Per M.P. Bohra:

These two appeals have been filed by the Revenue. It would be relevant to mention at this stage that out of two appeals before this Bench, Appeal No. ER-416/2000 relates to classification of jute carpets and Appeal No. ER-14/ 2001 relates to quantification of the disputed demand. The aforesaid two appeals were decided in favour of the Respondent's Company vide Orders dated 26.9.2000 and 9.2.2001 passed by this Tribunal. This Tribunal followed the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Charminar Nonwovens Limited Vs. CCE reported in 1998 (25) RLT 445. The department filed Civil Appeals before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the judgment in the case of Charminar Nonwovens Limited as well as various decisions of the CEGAT wherein CEGAT had followed the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court Hon'ble Supreme Court decided all the said matters together vide the judgment reported in 2004 (62) RLT 238 (SC)=2004 (167) ELT 372. These matters were also remanded back to the Tribunal for deciding the same afresh in accordance with law.

Facts relating to Appeal No. 416/2000 are given below:

2. This appeal has been filed by the Department against the Order-in-Appeal dated 13th March, 2000, passed by the Commissioner of Customs Central Excise (Appeals), Shillong. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent's Company against the Order dated 26.11.99 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, Bhubaneswar. The period involved is December, 1991 to February, 1999. The process of manufacture of the carpets as disclosed by the Respondents at the factory of the Respondent Company is as under:

The said carpets are manufactured by interlacement of three yarns which are simultaneously interlaid on the looms during the weaving process. For manufacture of the said carpets, the respondent buys or procures from its other units different types of yarn, such as, jute yarn, cotton yarn and polypropylene yarn. The said carpets are manufactured by the respondents only and exclusively out of yarn and the same do not consist of any base fabric. In the said carpets, jute always predominates by weight over each ofthe other single textile material. Earlier, the matter went to the Commissioner (Appeals). He passed Order-in-Appeal dated 27.6.95. By the said order, the Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority with the following remarks :

"That being the case, I remand the matter to the original Adjudicating Authority to decide the case afresh after obtaining the necessary technical report as mentioned supra, also allowing the natural justice to the appellant in accordance with law. The case disposed of accordingly."

After the remand order, the Department sent the samples of the carpets to the Jute Commissioner's Office for testing purposes. The Jute Commissioner, thereafter, got the said samples tested by the expert body on Jute Industry, namely, Indian Jute Industries Research Association. As per the reports of Indian Jute Industries Research Association, jute predominated by weight over each of the other single textile material in the said carpets and the extent of jute therein was found to be 51.02%, 49.37%, 50.12%, 51.45% 52.10% in different samples. The said expert body also found that the said carpets do not have any base fabric.

3. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise as well as the Departmental Chemical Examiner also visited the respondent Company and examined the entire process of manufacture and also tested the samples drawn on the spot. The Departmental Chemical Examiner also found and opined that the said carpets do not have any base fabric and that jute predominated therein by weight over each of the other single textile material and the percentage of jute was in fact more than 50%. This position was also admitted by the Assistant Commissioner in the show-cause notice issued on 28.5.1999. The Assistant Commissioner r