LawforAll

advocatemmmohan

My photo
since 1985 practicing as advocate in both civil & criminal laws

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - SHARE THE KNOWLEDGE

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

whether laminated panels of particle and medium density fiber board should be classified under sub- heading no. 4406.90 and 4407.90 or under sub- heading no. 4408.90. The appellant alleged that the product manufactured by the respondent herein was classifiable under sub heading 4408.90. For this purpose the appellant relied on Chapter Note 5 of Chapter 44 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') which reads as under:- "For the purposes of heading No. 44.08, the expression "similar laminated wood" includes blockboard, laminboard and battenboard, in which the core is thick and composed of blocks, laths or battens of wood glued or otherwise joined together and surfaced with the outer plies and also panels in which the wooden core is replaced by other materials such as a layer or layers of particle board, fiberboard, wood waste glued or otherwise joined together, asbestos or cork".


                                                 1








                                                                REPORTABLE 








                 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA




                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION






                    CIVIL APPEAL NO.4462  OF 2003 










COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NOIDA                                 .....Appellant.








                                      Versus




M/S. KITPLY INDUSTRIES LTD.                                       .....Respondent










WITH




CIVIL APPEAL NO.9736 OF 2003










                               J U D G M E N T










ANIL R. DAVE, J.








1.     The present appeals arise out of the judgments and orders passed on 




23.9.2002 and 6.6.2003 by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate 




Tribunal,   New   Delhi   and   the   Customs,   Excise   &   Service   Tax   Appellate 




Tribunal,   dismissing   the   appeals   filed   by   the   appellant-   Revenue 



                                                    2








Department. By this judgment, we dispose of  Civil Appeal Nos. 4462/2003 




and 9736/2003 as they involve similar questions of law. 








2.      The   issue   which   falls   for   consideration   in   the   present   appeals   is 




whether laminated panels of particle and medium density fiber board should 




be   classified   under   sub-   heading   no.   4406.90   and   4407.90     or   under   sub-




heading no. 4408.90.   The appellant alleged that the product manufactured 




by the respondent herein was classifiable under sub heading 4408.90.   For 




this   purpose   the   appellant   relied   on   Chapter   Note   5   of   Chapter   44   of   the 




Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') which 




reads as under:-








        "For   the   purposes   of   heading   No.   44.08,     the   expression 


        "similar laminated wood" includes blockboard, laminboard 


        and battenboard, in which the core is thick and composed of 


        blocks, laths  or  battens  of wood  glued   or otherwise  joined 


        together and surfaced with the outer plies and also panels in 


        which the wooden core is replaced by other materials such 


        as   a   layer   or   layers   of   particle   board,   fiberboard,   wood 


        waste glued or otherwise joined together, asbestos or cork".










For the sake of convenience, the relevant headings are also extracted below:






"44.06   -   Particle   board   and   similar   board   of   wood   or   other   ligneous  




materials,   whether   or   not   agglomerated   with   resins   or   other   organic  




binding substances.



                                                     3








4406.10- Plain particle boards. 






4406.20- Insulation board and hardboard






4406.30-   Veneered   particle   board,     not   having   decorative   veneers   on   any  




face






4406.90-Other. 






44.07 - Fiber board of wood or other ligneous materials, whether or not  




bonded with resins or other organic substances.






4407.10-Insulation board and hardboard






4407.90- Other. 






44.08-Pplywood, veneered panels and similar laminated wood. 






4408.10 - Marine plywood and aircraft plywood.






4408.30- Decorative plywood






4408.40-   Cuttings   and   trimmings   of   plywood   of   width   not   exceeding   5  




centimeters






4408.90 - Other". 






3.      In  order   to   decide   the   issue   arising   in   the  present   case   in  its   proper 




perspective,   basic   facts   leading   to   filing   of   the   present   appeals   are   being 




recapitulated hereunder: 



                                                     4








The   respondent   asessee,   who   is   engaged   in   the   manufacture   of   wood   and 




articles   of   wood   falling   under   Chapter   44,   was   issued   show   cause   notices 




dated   16.2.2000   and   27.12.2000   by   the   appellant   authorities,   inter   alia, 




calling   upon   it   to   show   cause   as   to   why   classification   of   its   products   (1) 




Laminated Particle Board and (2) Laminated Medium Density Fibre Board 




should not be changed to chapter Sub-heading no 4408.90 The respondent 




replied  to  the  said   notices  refuting  the   allegations  on  merits  as   well  as   on 




limitation.   The   said   show   cause   notices   were   adjudicated   and   the   demand 




proposed   therein   was   dropped   by   the   Commissioner   of   Central   Excise, 




Meerut-II   vide   Orders   dated   20.4.2001   and   31.10.2001   respectively.   The 




Commissioner,  ultimately found that the pre requisites of Chapter Note 5 of 




Chapter 44 were not satisfied and, therefore,  no further action was taken so 




far as the aforestated classification was concerned. 








4.      Aggrieved   by   the   orders,   the   Revenue   filed   appeals   before   the 




Tribunal.   The   Tribunal   dismissed   the   said   appeals   vide   orders   dated 




23.9.2002 and 6.6.2003, upholding the findings of the Commissioner. 








5.      Aggrieved   by   the   orders   of   the   Tribunal,   the   Reveue   has   filed   the 




present appeals. 



                                                    5








6.      The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal had 




erred   in   not   appreciating   that   the   manufacturing   process,   as   stated   by   the 




factory manager clarified that "pre-laminated" meant already laminated and 




as a result of the process,  the surface of the panels become water resistant as 




well   as   scratch   resistant   and   due   to   melamine   surface,   it   resisted   cigarette 




burns and also got an attractive look.  In spite of the above facts stated by the 




factory manager with regard to the process,   the respondent-assessee never 




mentioned the word "Panel" in the manufacturing process submitted  along 




with classification declared under Rule 173 B of the Act. 








7.      Learned   counsel   for   the   appellant   further   argued   that   Chapter   Note 




44.08   specifically   speaks   of   plywood,   veneered   panels   and   `similar 




laminated wood'. He pointed out that in the instant case, it is an admitted 




fact   that  the   goods   in  question,   which   are  `wood  products'     are   laminated 




and   they   are   covered   under   chapter   heading   44.08   and   not   under   chapter 




heading 44.06 as there is no mention of lamination in the latter chapter sub 




heading. 








8.      The learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that the Tribunal 




failed to appreciate that if a product is capable of being classified under two 




chapter headings, then Rule 3 (c) of the Rules for interpretation of  the   Act 



                                                     6








envisages   that   classification   under   the   heading,   which   occurs   last   in   the 




numerical   order.   Therefore,   chapter   sub-heading   4408.90   would   be   the 




appropriate sub heading for classification of the products in question. 








9.        To substantiate his claim, he relied on the cases of CCE, SHILLONG 




v.  WOOD   CRAFT   PRODUCTS   LTD.  1995   (77)   ELT   23,  M/S  




SAUSASHTRA   CHEMICALS    v.  COLLECTOR   OF   CUSTOMS,  




BOMBAY  1986   (23)   ELT   283,  DECORATIVE   LAMINATED   (INDIA)  




PVT   LTD    v.  COLLR.   OF   C.   EX.,   BANGALORE    1996   (86)   ELT   186  




(S.C.). 








10.       On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted 




that for Chapter Note 5 of Chapter 44 to apply, an essential pre-requisite is 




that the similar laminated wood must be surfaced with outer piles,  which is 




conspicuously   absent   in   the   present   case   and   hence   the   said   chapter   note 




would   not   apply.   He   also   submitted   that   the   impregnation   is   only   an 




additional   process,   which   is   done   on   the   particle   board   to   increase   its 




strength and, therefore, the goods would still continue to fall under heading 




4406. 








11.       The   learned   counsel   also   submitted   that   the   decision   in   the   case   of 




Wood Craft Products Ltd.  (supra) would not be applicable to the instant 



                                                    7








case as it was with respect to classification of block board. The respondent 




relied on the case of CCE, INDORE v. BOMBAY BURMAH TRADING 




CORPN.   LTD.  2000(39)   RLT   184   to   substantiate   its   claim   that   pre-




laminated particle board is classifiable  under heading 44.06 and not under 




heading 44.08. 








12.    We   have   heard   the   learned   counsel   for   the   parties   and   perused   the 




records. 








13.      It   is   not   in   dispute   that   the   product   before   the   lamination   is   not 




classifiable   under   tariff   heading   44.08.   However,   it   is   the   case   of   the 




appellant that after the lamination, the panels so obtained become a distinct 




product   falling   outside   the   purview   of   44.06.   Hence,   what   needs   to   be 




determined   by   us   is   whether   even   after   the   lamination,   the   products   falls 




under sub-heading 4406.90 and 4407.90 or would it fall under sub- heading 




4408.90. 








14.    For this purpose, it is important to refer to the statement of the factory 




manager Shri B.V Rao, who stated that in the process of manufacture of the 




panels,   plain   panels   of   the   mother   boards   (plain   particle/MDF   fiber)   are 




used. Papers are passed through the impregnating unit wherein the resin and 




other   required   chemicals   are   spread   on   the   paper   and   the   paper   gets 



                                                  8








impregnated.  The  impregnated  paper  is further  dried   and  cut into  required 




length. These paper sheets are assembled with the mother boards in such a 




way that  the impregnated paper is  placed on the upper side and one layer of 




impregnated   design   paper   is   placed   over   one   layer   of   impregnated   tissue 




paper.   This   assembly   is   put   for   pressing   under   the   required   heat   and 




pressure.   The   above   assembly   is   taken   out   as   pre-laminated   boards   and   is 




ready for dispatch. 








15.    From the above process,  it is clear that the products are pre-laminated 




wood,   most   aptly   falling   under   chapter   heading   44.08   as   the   said   chapter 




heading   specifically   speaks   of   plywood,   veneered   panels   and   similar 




laminated wood. The word "similar"  discussed in the above para has been 




discussed   by   this   court   in   the   case   of  CCE,   Shilling  v  M/S   Wood   Craft 




Products Ltd. (supra) wherein  a similar issue with regard to  "Block board" 




had arisen.  For sound reasons recorded,  this Court held that `Block board' 




should be  classified under heading No. 44.08.  The logic applied in the case 




of   `Block board' can very well be applied in the instant case.   In the said 




judgment, this Court observed as under in paras 5 and 6








               "5.           It is significant   that Heading No. 44.12 of the 


               HSN is the same as Heading No.   44.08 of the Indian 


               tariff   and   reads   "Plywood,   veneered   panels   and 


               similar   laminated   wood."     The   explanatory   notes   on 



                                                 9








              the   HSN   indicate   the   meaning   of   the   expression 


              "similar laminated wood" as under:-




              "similar laminated wood.   This group can be divided 


              into two categories:




              Block board, lamin board and batten board, in which 


              the   core   is   thick   and   composed   of   blocks,     laths   or 


              battens of wood glued together and surfaced with the 


              outer   plies.     Panels   of   this   kind   are   very   rigid   and 


              strong and can be used without framing or backing."




              6.         It   is   clear   that   if   the   expression   "similar 


              laminated wood" in the Indian Tariff is understood as 


              it meant under the HSN on which pattern the Central 


              Excise   Tariff   Act   is   based,     then   block   boards   of   all 


              kinds     would   fall   within   the   expressionn   "similar 


              laminated  wood".  This   is   how   the   amended   Chapter 


              Note reads expressly.   The question is whether it can 


              be so read even for the earlier periods particularly the 


              first  period   before   amendment  of  Chapter   Note   5  to 


              expressly   include   block   board   in   the   expression 


              "similar laminated wood".










16.    Heading   44.08   in   the   instant   case   covers     "plywood",     "veneered 




panels" together with all kinds of "similar laminated wood".  In other words, 




it   is   treating   "plywood"   or   "veneered   panels"   as   "laminated   wood". 




Therefore,  it covers all kinds of laminated wood bearing any resemblance to 




"plywood" or "veneered panels". The word used is "similar" and not "same". 




Thus,   some   resemblance   to   "plywood"   or   "veneered   panels"   is   enough, 



                                                      10








provided the article can be treated as "laminated wood". The sweep of the 




heading is, therefore, quite wide.








 17.    Therefore, for the product to be classified under the above heading, it 




is   enough   if   it   is   similar   to   laminated   wood,     which   in   the   instant   case   is 




proved   beyond   reasonable   doubt.     Even     factory   manager,   Shri   B.V.   Rao 




admitted the   facts with regard to lamination.   At this point we may again 




refer to the case of   M/s. Wood Craft Products Ltd. (supra).   It has been 




mentioned   therein   that   "The   meaning   of   the   significant   words   and 




description   of   the   wood   products   as   intermediate   materials   meant   for 




manufacture of final products clearly indicate that "laminated wood" means 




a wood product  prepared by placing layer on layer and "block board" is a 




plywood   board   with   a   core   of   wood.   Any   plywood   board   with   a   core   of 




wood in which there are layers, one above the other is, therefore, laminated 




wood similar to plywood or, veneered panels. It is "similar laminated wood" 




included   in   the   heading   "Plywood,   veneered   panels   and   similar   laminated 




wood". Similarity with, and not identity with plywood or veneered panels is 




required".








18.     From the above, it is clear that the product is similar to plywood and 




veneered   panels   and   hence   tariff   heading   44.08   is   squarely   applicable. 



                                                     11








Further, in the instant case, the core layer is  made up of the particle board or 




MDF board (referred to as "mother boards" in the process mentioned above) 




and   joined   together   with   the   help   of     resins   and   then   laminated   with 




plasticised   paper   (paper   impregnated   with   melamine   formaldehyde   resin). 




Hence it is also clearly seen that the laminated panels manufactured by the 




respondent are covered under Chapter Note 5 to Chapter 44 of the schedule 




to the Act. The product need not be same as plywood or veneered panels but 




mere similarity with them is enough for chapter note 5 to apply. 








19.     The   Tribunal   has   erred   in   holding   that   as   "particle   board"   is 




specifically   covered   under   heading   44.06,   laminated   particle   board   will 




come under the scope of "similar board of wood" under the said heading. It 




is   clear   that   the   product   after   the   lamination   is   a   distinct   marketable 




commodity   different   from   the   original   one.   This   conclusion   is   further 




substantiated   by   the   fact   that   Shri   B.V.   Rao   said   in   his   statement   that   the 




panels   after   lamination,   become   water   resistant   and   look   attractive   due   to 




printed paper and brings about a change in the name, usage etc. Therefore, 




the   Tribunal's   conclusion   that   the   laminated   board   is   similar   to   `particle 




board' is incorrect and cannot be accepted. 



                                                   12








20.     The respondent has placed reliance on the pari materia heading in the 




HSN 44.10 to contend that the product is classifiable under chapter heading 




44.06. We cannot accept this argument. In the proviso to the said heading, it 




has been mentioned that if the manufacturing process gives the product the 




essential   character   of   articles   of   another   heading,     then   chapter   heading 




44.12   will   not   apply.   In   the   instant   case,   going   by   the   statement   of   the 




respondent's   own   officer,   the   product   after   lamination   assumes   a   distinct 




marketability and brings about a change in the product.  This change,  after 




lamination   makes   the   product   fall   outside   the   purview   of   chapter   heading 




44.06 and  that would place the product under chapter heading 44.08 as the 




word   used   under   chapter   heading   44.08   is   "similar  laminated  wood" 




(emphasis supplied).  Further recourse may also be taken to rule 3 (c) of the 




Rules for interpretation of the Act which envisages that if the products are 




capable   of   classification   under   two   chapter   headings,   then   as   per   the   said 




rule,  the classification  must  be under the heading which  occurs last  in the 




numerical order. Therefore, heading 4408.90 would be the appropriate sub 




heading for classification  of  the product in question. 








21.     In terms of the above conclusions arrived at and on appreciation of the 




materials  on record, we are of the view that the findings arrived  at by the 




Tribunal are unjustified  and cannot be accepted. The impugned judgments 



                                         13








and orders passed by the Tribunal in both the appeals are, therefore, set aside 




and it would be open to the   appellant   to assess the respondent as per the 




above findings. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed but leaving the parties 




to bear their own costs. 










                                                                                       ...............


                                                                       ...................................J.




                                               (Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA)




                                                                   




                                                                                     


                                               .....................................................J. 


                                               (ANIL R. DAVE)




New Delhi




September  7, 2011.