Per Shri V.P. Gulati :

The issue in this appeal relates to the classification of watch glasses which are manufactured in flat form out of float/plate glasses by cutting the same in size by trimming and working the edges to render the same useable for the same. The competing tariff items are 91.14, 7011.90 and 70.03. The said competing items are reproduced below for convenience of reference :

2. The learned Advocate for the appellants has pleaded that the goods were originally classified under Tariff Heading 91.14 which covers watch parts and the appellants paid duty based on this approved classification. Subsequently, however, the department had second thoughts and issued a show cause notice for re-classification of the goods under Tariff Heading 7011.90 and the said classification after grant of personal hearing has been approved by the authorities and which is now disputed before us. The learned Advocate has pleaded that primarily he will be urging that the goods would be classifiable under Tariff Heading 70.03 taking into consideration the way the same has been formed. He has pleaded that the articles of float glass are covered under Tariff Heading 70.03 and not under 7011.90. His plea is that though Tariff Heading 7011.90 covers watch glasses, the same as per the Chapter Notes under HSN will have to be in a curved form for being assessed under this heading. He has pleaded that the appellant's goods are in a float form and, therefore, by reason of Chapter Notes to HSN on which Central Excise Tariff is based, the same would be classifiable under 70.03 rather than under 7011.90. He has pleaded that Chapter Heading 70.15 of HSN is similar to 70.11 of Central Excise Tariff and he referred us to notes at page 938 of the HSN wherein it is clearly mentioned that the watch glasses covered under that heading would be only those which are curved.

3. It was pointed to the learned Advocate that the description at the relevant time under Tariff Heading 7011 in the Central Excise Tariff and 7015 in the HSN was not exactly similar and the word curved after describing the glasses which are covered is missing in the description given under 7011 in the Central Excise Tariff and he was asked to explain when there was a difference in the description and the word curved specifically figured in HSN while it did not figure in the corresponding entry 7011 under the Central Excise Tariff, how the Chapter Notes of HSN could be pressed into service by him. He pleaded the word curved can be taken to classify only the optical glasses and not watch glasses. He pleaded that for assessment under 7003 he draws authority from the HSN corresponding Tariff entry 7006 under which it has been set out that the heading not only in the form of semi-finished products but also articles of float glasses designed for specific purpose. He has pleaded for that reason the goods would merit classification under 7003.

4. He has further argued that under the Customs Tariff under Notification 43/85 dated 20.02.85 an exemption has been granted to watch crystals i.e. watch glasses and the tariff heading shown against watch crystals is 9014. He, however, could not show us any authority in support of his plea that watch crystals and watch glasses are one and the same. Even otherwise, the exemption notification cannot determine the classification of the goods as the notification extend benefit to a certain category of goods and if the description of the goods have been elaborated notwithstanding the classification given, the benefit will have to be primarily considered based on the description of the goods. This plea of the appellants, therefore, for claiming the assessment under 91.14 in preference to assessment under Chapter 70, is not acceptable as Chapter 70 covers under the various h