Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Uni Products

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Uni Products

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 01, 2000

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/17779

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/17779
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: Mar 01, 2000
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

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

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Uni Products

Legal References

Reported In: (2000)(119)ELT149TriDel

Excerpt

1. all these 4 appeals have been filed by the revenue. in all the appeals common question of law is involved and as such have been taken up together.2. the issue involved in these appeals is regarding the classification of carpets of the floor covering. the stand taken up by the revenue is that the product is classifiable under chapter heading 5703.90 of the tariff act. while the respondents contention is that it is covered under chapter sub-heading 5703.20 of the tariff act. this issue, in fact, stands already settled between the parties by the decision rendered by the double member bench of the tribunal in the case of uni products v. cce, new delhi, decided vide its final order 44-47/2000-d, dated 11-2-2000 (copy placed on record by the respondents) wherein it has been ruled that the product is classifiable under chapter sub-heading 5703.20 of the schedule to the central excise tariff act and not under chapter sub-heading 5703.90. in view of this judgment of the tribunal, all the present appeals filed by the revenue have to be dismissed, as the demand was raised by the revenue against the respondents by classifying the product under chapter sub-heading 5703.90 of the tariff act. resultantly, all the appeals of the revenue fail and they are dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. All these 4 appeals have been filed by the Revenue. In all the appeals common question of law is involved and as such have been taken up together.

2. The issue involved in these appeals is regarding the classification of Carpets of the Floor Covering. The stand taken up by the Revenue is that the product is classifiable under Chapter Heading 5703.90 of the Tariff Act. While the respondents contention is that it is covered under Chapter sub-heading 5703.20 of the Tariff Act. This issue, in fact, stands already settled between the parties by the decision rendered by the Double Member Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Uni Products v. CCE, New Delhi, decided vide its final Order 44-47/2000-D, dated 11-2-2000 (Copy placed on record by the respondents) wherein it has been ruled that the product is classifiable under Chapter Sub-Heading 5703.20 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act and not under Chapter Sub-Heading 5703.90. In view of this judgment of the Tribunal, all the present appeals filed by the Revenue have to be dismissed, as the demand was raised by the Revenue against the respondents by classifying the product under Chapter Sub-Heading 5703.90 of the Tariff Act. Resultantly, all the appeals of the Revenue fail and they are dismissed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Uni Products Same Subject Service Tax