COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD versus M/S. SUSMA TEXTILE PVT. LTD.

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 168 · Decided: 05-05-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD 
v 
M/S. SUSMA TEXTILE PVT. LTD. 
MAY 5, 2004 
B 
[RAJENDRA BABU, CJ. AND G.P. MATHUR, J.] 
Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985-Tariff Heading No. 52.06-Cotton 
fab11ics stiff and heavily sized with starch gum and inorganic fillers-
Classification as 'Buckram' under heading 59.01-Held: Fabric having 
C undfrgone a process of padding by applying natural starch on the side of 
the fabric and not showing stijji1ess of permanent or durable nature and 
also not heavily sized fabric-Hence not classifiable under heading 59.01 
but under heading 52.06. 
D 
Respondents are engaged in the manufacture of cotton fabrics 
which is stiff and heavily sized with starch gum and inorganic fillers. 
Respondents classified the product under Heading 59.06 as it was 
subjected to the process of bleaching and finishing. The appellant-
excise department classified the product under heading 49.01 on basis 
E oftlje report that the sample is in the form of open weave cotton fabrics 
heavily sized and stiff with starch gum and inorganic fillers 
on treatment with hot water the fabrics loses all its stiffness. 
The department issued show cause notice to the respondents 
dem,anding differential duty. However, Assistant Commissioner held 
F that the cotton fabrics were correctly classifiable under Heading 52.06 
and dropped the demand raised. In appeal Collector (Appeals) held 
t~at the product in question is specifically covered under Heading 
59.01, tariff entry for stiffness textile fabrics. However, Tribunal held 
that the cotton fabrics though heavily sized do not have permanent 
stiffness to be treated as similar to 'Buckram', thus, classifiable under 
G Heading 52.06 and not Heading 59.01 of the Act. Hence the present 
appeals. 
Appellant-excise department contended that the Tribunal has 
gone on the basis of issue of permanent stiffness and not dealt with the 
H other 'nspect whether the fabric in question is heavily sized or not. 
168 
r
...... 
C.C.E. v. SUSMA TEXTILE PVT. LTD. 
169 
Respondents contended that the stiffness as contemplated under A 
Chapter 59 has to be of permanent or durable nature as 'Buckram' 
is a fabric which has a permanent stiffness. 
Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. For classifying cotton fabrics, stiff and heavily sized B 
with starch gum and inorganic fillers manufactured by the respondents 
under heading 59.01 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 the 
conditions to be fulfilled are that the fabric is a stiffened textile; that 
the stiffness is of durable and permanent in nature; and that the fabric 
is heavily sized. (174-E-Fl 
C 
1.2. In the instant case, the Tribunal found that the fabric of the 
respondents do not have permanent or :urable stiffness which is 
essential for a fabric to be classified as 'Buckram' in view of definition 
as understood ordinarily and as is referred to in the authoritative D 
textbooks. Further, the report given by the Chemical Examiner itself 
indicates the process undergone by the respondents' fabric is only that 
of padding and does not show any stiffness of permanent nature. 
Therefore, a fabric, which has undergone a process of padding by 
applying natural starch .on the side of the fabric, cannot be classified E 
as 'Buckram'. (174-G-H; 175-A; 174-GI. 
1.3. When the several ingredients have to be satisfied, even if one 
ingredient is not satisfied, namely, that the stiffness has to be of 
permanent and durable nature, the view taken by the Tribunal does 
not call for any interference and also in none of the present cases, there F 
is any heavily sized fabric. Thus, these are not the fit cases to be 
remanded back for fresh consideration on the question of heavily sized 
fabric. (175-B-CI 
Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad v. Solapur Zilla Vinkar G 
Sahakari Federation, (1998) 104 ELT 402, referred to. 
Dictionary of Textiles by Fairchild, referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1081 of 
1~8. 
H 
170 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.11.97 of the Central Excise 
Customs and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, West Regional Bench a; 
Mumbai in F.O. No. 5123/97/WRB in A. No. E/917/91-SB (WR). 
B 
WITH 
C.A. Nos. 8559/97, 1052, 5010/98, 3649, 3707, 4223/99, 5557, 69761 
2001 and 8973 of 2003. 
R.P. Bhatt, Mrs. Nisha Bagchi, Ms. Smeeta Inna, B. Krishna Prasad, 
C K.C. Kaushik, M.N. Shroff, C.M. Shroff, V. Lakshmi Kumaran, Alok 
Yadav, Madhav Ra

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.