- (1.) THE issue in this appeal turns on the language of Notification No. 82/88-CE dated 1/3/1988. The notification which was issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 exempted goods of the description specified in column 3 of the Table annexed to the notification from so much of the duty of excise which was in excess of the rate calculated under column 4 of the Table.
(2.) THE Table read as follows: JUDGEMENT_236_4_2005Html1.htm Both the Commissioner as well as the Tribunal came to the conclusion that by virtue of the words "under Chapter 52, Chapter 54 or 55" in column 4, the exemption was only available to goods, the base fabric of which was classified under any of those chapters. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant assessee has submitted that there was a basic misconception as to the role which entries under column 4 had to play. Column 4 only dealt with the rate and therefore the reference to Chapter 52 or Chapter 54 or 55 was only for the purpose of measurement of the rate and not for the purpose of defining the goods. Reliance has been placed upon the decision of this Court in J.K. Steel Ltd. v. Union of India to contend that the rate was not to be confused with the precondition for the operation of the notification.
(3.) IT may be noted here that the issue raised in this appeal also came up by way of a reference to a larger Bench of the Tribunal in the matter of CCE v. Entramonde Poly Coalers Ltd. The larger Bench held that the reference to chapter headings under the rate column did not mean that the base fabrics had to be made out of the material referable to those chapters. The decision in Entramonde Poly Coalers Ltd. is the subject-matter of separate appeal before us today, namely, CCE v. Entramonde Poly Coalers Ltd. It is clear from the language of the notification that the exemption was granted to the goods described in column 3. Column 3 speaks of "base fabrics of cotton". The word cotton is not limited by reference to any chapter heading. Therefore, textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics of base fabric of any form of cotton under any chapter of the Central Excise Tariff Act, would be entitled to the benefit of the notification at the rates specified under column 4. As far as the rate is concerned the applicable rate would be that which was leviable on base fabrics under Chapter 52, Chapter 54 or 55 as specified against the various serial numbers in the notification. Incidentally, it may also be mentioned that in the present case, the appellant's base fabric was cotton which was classifiable under Chapter 60 Tariff Heading 60.01. By Notification No. 109/86-CE dated 27/2/1986 the rate of duty as far as goods classifiable under, inter alia, Heading 60.01 was put on par with the rate for woven fabrics falling under, inter alia, Chapter 52, 54 or 55. In real terms therefore there was no distinction, as far as rates were concerned, with regard to the appellant's goods.;