Makkar and Loomba Vs. C.C.E.

Makkar and Loomba vs C.C.E.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jul 24, 1998

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/13949

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/13949
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: L Ram
Decided On: Jul 24, 1998
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Makkar and Loomba

Respondent

C.C.E.

Legal References

Reported In: (1999)(63)ECC198

Excerpt

.....coated cotton cloth was under sub-heading no. 5909.00 which covered "all other textile products and articles of a kind suitable for industrial use (for example textile fabrics, combined with one or more layers of rubber, leather or other material, bolting cloth, endless felts of textile fabrics, straining cloth). i also find that in the tribunal's decision in the case of collector of central excise vs.unitac industries it had been held that the cloth based self-adhesive tapes for industrial use were classifiable under sub-heading no. 5909.00 and not under s.h. no. 5906.90 of the tariff.the departmental representative confirmed that the goods are the same as were the subject matter of the board's circular and that of the tribunal's clarification aforesaid.6. in view of the submissions made by both the sides, i agree with the views taken by the learned member (j) that the goods in question were classifiable under sub-heading no. 5909.00.7. the file may now be placed before the original bench for further necessary action.in terms of the majority order the item "adhesive coated fabrics" falls under sub-heading 5909.00 as claimed by the appellants and in that view of the matter, the appeal is allowed.

Full Judgment

1. The question referred to me for determination in this appeal filed by M/s. Makkar & Loomba, New Delhi is whether the item--adhesive coated fabric was classifiable under sub-heading No. 5909.00 of the Central Excise Tariff or it was classifiable under sub-heading No. 5906.90 of the said Tariff.

2. I have heard Shri R. Swaminathan, Consultant for the appellants and Shri A.M. Tilak. JDR for the respondents/Revenue.

3. The Id. Consultant referred to the clarification issued by the Central Board of Excise & Customs under F.No. 59/3/90 CXI (Circular 24/90 CXI) dated 23.11.90 wherein it has been clarified that the adhesive coated fabrics was classifiable under sub-heading No. 5909.00.

He also referred to the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Ranadey Micronutrients v. Collector of Central Excise to plead that although the circular was issued subsequent to the impugned order, the Revenue could not plead against the said Circular.

4. In reply Shri A.M. Tilak, JDR submitted that in view of the Board's Circular, the view taken by the Id. Member (J) was correct. He also submitted that similar view had been taken by the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Belgaum v. Unitac Industries .

5. I have carefully considered the matter. I find that the classification as indicated in Board's Circular with regard to the .product adhesive coated cotton cloth was under sub-heading No. 5909.00 which covered "all other textile products and articles of a kind suitable for industrial use (for example textile fabrics, combined with one or more layers of rubber, leather or other material, bolting cloth, endless felts of textile fabrics, straining cloth). I also find that in the Tribunal's decision in the case of Collector of Central Excise vs.

Unitac Industries it had been held that the cloth based self-adhesive tapes for industrial use were classifiable under sub-heading No. 5909.00 and not under S.H. No. 5906.90 of the Tariff.

The Departmental Representative confirmed that the goods are the same as were the subject matter of the Board's Circular and that of the Tribunal's clarification aforesaid.

6. In view of the submissions made by both the sides, I agree with the views taken by the learned Member (J) that the goods in question were classifiable under sub-heading No. 5909.00.

7. The file may now be placed before the Original Bench for further necessary action.

In terms of the majority order the item "Adhesive Coated Fabrics" falls under sub-heading 5909.00 as claimed by the appellants and in that view of the matter, the appeal is allowed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Makkar and Loomba vs C.C.E. Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge L Ram