GUJARAT POLYCRETE PRIVATE LTD Vs. C.C.E.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue involved in this Appeal is whether the products manufactured by the Appellants are classifiable under sub -heading 3922.90 as claimed by them or under sub -heading 6807.00 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act as held by the Collector (Appeals) in the impugned order dated 13 -4 -1989.

(2.) M /s. Gujarat Polycrate Private Limited manufacture Sanitary ware articles, for example, bath tubs, shower trays, counter wash basins, water closets, flush tanks and bathroom accessories. They filed a classification list No. 6/86 claiming the classification under sub -heading 3922.90, which was approved by the Assistant Collector. However, on appeal by the Department, the Collector (Appeals) set aside the order -in -original and classified the products under sub -heading 6807.00 holding that products in question are made out of raw materials like silica, quartz, dolomite with stone dust and these are mixed with polyethylene resin; that the essential character flows from the raw materials other than Polythelene resin which acts only as a binder and accordingly following Rule 3(b) of Interpretative rules, goods would be classifiable under sub -heading 6807.00.

(3.) SHRI K.K. Anand, ld. Advocate, submitted on behalf of the appellants, that the impugned products are manufactured out of Synthetic resins and the appellants use fillers like Silica, quartz, dolomite, and stone dust, as supporting or reinforcing agents, in the course of mixing operation: that resin constitutes 32% of the product whereas in organic fillers 68%; that the sanitarywares manufactured by the appellants, despite the use of fillers retain the essential character of articles of plastics; that the resin provides the essential character to the impugned products; that Rule 3(b) of the Interpretative Rules does not refer to composition of the product and accordingly percentage of resin is of no importance in applying the Rule 3(b) of the Interpretative Rules. He further submitted that the physical properties of cement bonded concrete were well defined and limited and it was thus necessary to explore new avenues if special demands made on concrete were to be met; that it was realised that the most promising and reasonable way to improve the properties of concrete was the utilisation of synthetic resins as bonding agent. In support of his contention, the ld. Advocate relied upon 'Respecta, Resin - concrete, Casting - Machine. Proposal 6773, according to which "This Concrete, a hardened mixture of multicomponent plastics and dry aggregates, offers a vastly increased strength, a high resistance to chemicals, an almost absolute impervi -ousness, quick curing and hardening - in fact just about those properties which cannot be achieved with the conventional cement concrete. Furthermore, it is easily possible to make very decorative products in all designs and with all surface effects, like marble, granite, slate etc. The ld. Advocate further mentioned that the product is termed as polyster stone which is a mix of filler materials, unsaturated polyster resin, hardners, and pigments, if desired; that the value of resin is very high in comparison to the value of filler material; that in case of technical application it is about 77% and in respect of decorative application is 68% as per the Book referred to above; that the technical literature describes the goods as Plastic resin concrete and accordingly they have named their products as "Polycrete" i.e. Polymer Concrete.