Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (3) TMI 166

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e category of Mosiac, the category of goods would not debar it from the category of Mosaic. In the present case the Tiles as per the terminology used are “Chequered”, “Rockard” etc to represent them individual species of the germ “Mosaic Tiles”. If only genus is covered by the exemption and not the individual species in that case no exemption would be available where the genus is named in exemption and not the individual species. The Hon’ble Court in the case of KEDIA AGGLOMERATED MARBLES LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE [2003 (1) TMI 104 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] held that the Tiles in question would merit classification as ‘Mosaic Tiles’ despite the fact that the commercial name of the Tiles was not Mosaic Tiles and were sold by unique name to each product - In the present case following the same analogy of the Hon’ble Apex Court as above, it can be held that an individual tile, which has an inherent well defined visible pattern or design contributed by the marble or stone chips mixed in the cement, is without any doubt, a mosaic tile, notwithstanding the fact that the goods are marketed by the manufacturer by using the Trade Name coined by the manufacturer. The go .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... respondent. The product brouchers also advertise Mosaic Tiles (Grey white) separately in addition to the Chequered Tiles, Decorative Pavers etc which implies that the Mosaic tiles are different from the Tiles in question. The Chequered Tiles, Plain cement tiles, Solid Rock pavers, Rock tiles, Rockard designer tiles and Paver Blocks though classifiable under chapter sub heading 6807.90 of the CETA, 1985 but should have been removed on payment of duty at the tariff rate. It was also proposed to confiscate the seized goods which were lying in stock as the same were allegedly misclassified. Apart from proposing demand of duty and penalty from Respondent, penalties were also proposed upon the director Smt. Poonam Talwar and Shri B. K. Chakraborty (AGM Operations) and Shri Peter Dsouza (Sales Coordinator). The proposed demand, penalties and confiscation of goods were dropped by the adjudicating authority vide Order dt. 25.04.2006. Hence the present appeal by the revenue. 2. The Ld. Commissioner Ajay Kumar, Ld. Additional Commissioner (A.R.) appearing for the Revenue submits that the entry No.170 appearing in Notification No.6/2000 CE dt 1/3/2000 and similar entry in Notificati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Hon ble Supreme Court. That if the intention of the Govt. was to grant exemption to all Mosaic tiles, the entry in the notification would have stopped at that meaning to say that all tiles, which technically and chemically constitute the description of Mosaic tiles either by its manufacturing process or the specification in Bureau of Indian Standards, which is not so. The notification has laid emphasis on the words that is to sayand thus, the notification has to be read in its strictest possible terms. He relies upon the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Ginni Filaments Ltd - 2005 (181) ELT 145 (SC) and NTB International Pvt Ltd 2005 (184) ELT A123 (SC). He submits that the Board s Tariff Advice of the year 1971 (Circular 7/71) referred to in the adjudication order cannot be relied upon as the same was issued in the context of earlier tariff item system of classification and cannot be applied to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 system of classification and that too in the context of interpretation of the notification involved in the present case. That the Tariff Advice was in the context of Terrazzo Tiles, which were held to be Mosaic Tiles, which is not the subj .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that unicoloured tiles made from glass are Mosaic Tile and the above decision categorically held that tiles of a single colour also are commercially known as Mosaic Tiles. The Apex court in the case of Kedia Marbles (supra) held that tiles marketed under the trade names, Marbella Agglomerated Marbles and Marbellan Tiles etc. are technically and commercially known as Mosaic Tiles. The Apex court held that a typical name can be given to a product by its manufacturer to distinguish its goods from the goods of others, but exemption shall still be available. In that case, the exemption under Notification No.59/90-CE was claimed by the assessee on the ground that though the names such as Marbella Tiles, Marbella Agglomerated Marbles were adopted, the said products were commercially known as Mosaic Tiles. That in the present case also, the goods are Mosaic tiles, that is to say the tiles known commercially as Mosaic tiles though the products are marketed by adopting a different commercial name, unique to each product. The ld. Counsel submits that the dictionary meaning of Mosaic is a pattern or design, as per which the Mosaic means - (a) A picture or decorative design made b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... joining of tiles together is a Mosaic and even the unique colour tiles are mosaic tiles. He also relies upon the Tribunal order in case of Shon Ceramics wherein it was held that the chemical composition of tiles is not important for classifying the product under Tariff item 23D of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff as Mosaic Tiles . He prays to uphold the impugned order. 4. We have gone through the records and submission made by both the sides including the manufacturing process, definition of Mosaic, IS Specification of Mosaic Tiles and judgments cited by them. We find that the manufacturing process of Tiles undertaken by the Respondent is that the Tiles are made in two layers where the top layers consist of cement, sand, dolomite powder, marble chips and emery stones and the bottom layer consists of cement and crushed stone. It is in top layer that different designs either on a plain surface or in chequred format appear. The top layer is having thickness of 8 - 15 mm as per the requirement and the balance thickness of the tiles is of bottom layer. In manufacturing process the Top layer mix is poured into mould and then bottom layer is poured. Afterwards the material is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... igible for exemption from duty. The term Mosaic is a germ and once the goods belong to the category of Mosiac, the category of goods would not debar it from the category of Mosaic. In the present case the Tiles as per the terminology used are Chequered , Rockard etc to represent them individual species of the germ Mosaic Tiles . If only genus is covered by the exemption and not the individual species in that case no exemption would be available where the genus is named in exemption and not the individual species. Our views are also based upon the Hon ble Apex Court judgment in case of M/s Kedia Agglomerated Marbles Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2003 (152) ELT 22 (SC) wherein the Hon ble Court held as under : Para 14. The ordinary dictionary meaning of mosaic is pattern or design with inlaid glass or stone. It is also not seriously disputed that tiles manufactured by appellants from marble chips satisfy the dictionary meaning of the word mosaic. The only dispute raised by the department is that the appellant s product even though technically can be described as Mosaic Tile is not proved to be commercially known as such to be eligible for claiming benefit of exemption notifi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y of the Hon ble Apex Court as above, we are in agreement with the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the respondent that an individual tile, which has an inherent well defined visible pattern or design contributed by the marble or stone chips mixed in the cement, is without any doubt, a mosaic tile, notwithstanding the fact that the goods are marketed by the manufacturer by using the Trade Name coined by the manufacturer. We are in agreement with the Respondent submission that the Mosaic may be of three kinds i.e the first category of Mosaic Tiles can be the one where a well defined pattern or design is visible on the individual tile. The second category would be the Tiles such as the tiles referred to in Kedia s case where an undefined design or pattern contributed by haphazardly scattered small chips of coloured stones or marble embedded in the cement tile is visible. The third category refers to the individual tiles whether uni-coloured or multi-coloured, which collectively contribute to a mosaic design when these are fixed at a given site or location. These tiles could be either in square, rectangle or in any other geometric shape. When these are affixed at a given location, a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates