{"id":263325,"date":"2005-01-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-01-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005"},"modified":"2015-08-20T01:43:06","modified_gmt":"2015-08-19T20:13:06","slug":"collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005","title":{"rendered":"Collector Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Collector Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005<\/div>\n
Author: S N Variava<\/div>\n
Bench: S.N.Variava, Dr.Ar.Lakshmanan, S.H.Kapadia<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  3832-3837 of 1999\n\nPETITIONER:\nCollector of Central Excise, Kanpur\n\nRESPONDENT:\nM\/s Matador Foam & Ors.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 05\/01\/2005\n\nBENCH:\nS. N. Variava, Dr. AR. Lakshmanan & S. H. Kapadia\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
S. N. VARIAVA, J.\n<\/p>\n
\tThese Appeals are against the Judgment dated 22nd of January
\n1999 of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal
\n[CEGAT].\n<\/p>\n
\tBriefly stated the facts are as follows.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe question involved is whether the goods manufactured by the
\nRespondents fall under Tariff Item 94.01 or Tariff Item 40.08.  It is an
\nadmitted position that the Respondents manufactured goods made out
\nof vulcanised rubber, other than hardened rubber, and their goods are
\ncut to the shape of seats of motor vehicles or two wheelers.  The
\nRespondents had filed a classification list showing the products under
\nTariff Heading 40.08.  This had been approved.  However, a show-
\ncause notice dated 17th May 1990 was issued by the Assistant
\nCommissioner raising a demand for the differential duty on the ground
\nthat the products should correctly be classified under Tariff Item
\n94.01.  After giving a personal hearing, the Assistant Commissioner
\nconfirmed the demand.  Thereafter, three further show-cause notices
\ndated 31st May 1990, 1st May 1990 and 31st May 1990 respectively
\nwere issued to the Respondents calling upon them to show-cause as to
\nwhy the benefit wrongly availed of them under Notification No. 175 of
\n1986 dated 1st March 1986 be not cancelled. The Respondents were
\ncalled upon to pay duty.  After hearing the Respondents, by Orders
\ndated 13th March 1991, it was held that the Respondents were not
\nentitled to exemption.  They were called upon to pay duty.
\n\tIt must be mentioned that the Board issued a clarification that
\nthe goods of the kind manufactured by the Respondents were
\nclassifiable under Tariff Heading 94.01 if they were meant for seats of
\nmotor vehicles and Tariff Heading 87.14 if they were meant for seats
\nof two wheelers.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe Respondents filed the Appeals, which were dismissed by the
\nCommissioner (Appeals).  The Respondents then filed further Appeals
\nto CEGAT.   Earlier decisions of CEGAT, holding that such goods fell
\nunder Tariff Heading 94.01 were cited.  In spite of that CEGAT
\nconcluded, in the impugned Judgment, that such goods should fall
\nunder Tariff Heading 40.08.  In so doing, CEGAT relied upon another
\nJudgment of the Tribunal which had dealt with earlier Tariff Headings
\n16A and 34A.  It must be mentioned that those Tariff Headings were
\ncompletely different from the Tariff Headings now under consideration.
\n\tTariff Headings 94.01 and 40.08 read as follows:
\n“94.01:\tSeats (other than those of heading
\nNo.40.01), whether or not
\nconvertible into beds, and parts
\nthereof.\n<\/p>\n
40.08:\tPlates, blocks, sheets, strikes, rods
\nand profile shapes of vulcanized
\nrubber other than hardened rubber
\nof cellular rubber.”\n<\/p>\n
\tIt is also necessary to consider certain Chapter Notes which have
\nbeen relied upon by the parties.  In Chapter 94, Notes 1 (a) and 2
\nread as follows:\n<\/p>\n
“1. This Chapter does not cover:\n<\/p>\n
(a)\tPneumatic or water mattresses, pillows
\nor cushions, of Chapter 39,40 or 63;\n<\/p>\n
………………………………………………………..
\n………………………………………………………..\n<\/p>\n
2.\tThe articles (other than parts) referred to
\nin heading Nos.94.01 to 94.03 are to be
\nclassified in those headings only if they are
\ndesigned for placing on the floor or ground.\n<\/p>\n
\t  The following are, however, to be
\nclassified in the above-mentioned headings
\neven if they are designed to be hung, to be
\nfixed to the wall or to stand one on the other:\n<\/p>\n
(a)\tCupboards, bookcases, other
\nshelved furniture and unit
\nfurniture;\n<\/p>\n
(b)\tSeats and beds.”\n<\/p>\n
In Chapter 40, Notes 2 (e) and 9 read as follows:\n<\/p>\n
“2. This Chapter does not cover:\n<\/p>\n
(a)\t…………………………………………..\n<\/p>\n
(b)\t…………………………………………..\n<\/p>\n
(c)\t…………………………………………..\n<\/p>\n
(d)\t…………………………………………..\n<\/p>\n
(e)\tArticles of Chapter 90, 92, 94 or 96;\n<\/p>\n
(f)\t…………………………………………..”\n<\/p>\n
………………………………………………………….\n<\/p>\n
9.\tIn heading Nos.40.01, 40.02, 40.03,
\n40.05 and 40.08, except as otherwise provided,
\nthe expressions ‘plates’, `sheets’ and `strips’
\napply only to plates, sheets and strip and to
\nblocks of regular geometric shape, uncut or
\nsimply cut to rectangular (including square)
\nshape, whether or not having the character of
\narticles and whether or not printed or otherwise
\nsurface-worked, but not otherwise cut to shape
\nor further worked.\n<\/p>\n
\t\tIn heading No.40.08, the expressions
\n`rods’ and `profile shapes’ apply only to such
\nproducts, whether or not cut to length or
\nsurface-worked but not otherwise worked.\n<\/p>\n
\t\tSub-heading No.4008.21 shall also apply
\nto “plates”, “sheets” and “strips”, whether or
\nnot cut to shape and surface-worked or further
\nworked so as to render them fit for resoling or
\nrepairing or re-treading of rubber-tyres.”\n<\/p>\n
\t\tMr. Jain, learned counsel for the Respondents, has strongly
\nrelied upon Chapter Note 1 (a) of Chapter 94 and submitted that
\npneumatic or water mattresses, pillows or cushions of Chapter 39, 40
\nand 63 are excluded from Chapter 94.  He submitted that
\nRespondents’ goods are cushions falling under Chapter 40 and are
\nthus covered by Tariff Item 40.08. They submitted that they are thus
\nexcluded from the purview of Chapter 94.  He submitted that,
\ntherefore, Tariff Heading 94.01 cannot cover goods of the
\nRespondents.\n<\/p>\n
 On the other hand, Mr. Venkataramani submitted that Tariff
\nItem 94.01 is a specific Item, which deals with seats and parts thereof.
\nHe pointed out that it is an admitted position that the Respondents
\ngoods are cut to the shape of seats and are only used in seats of
\nbuses, motor vehicles and\/or two wheelers.  He submitted that there
\nbeing a specific Entry covering seats and parts thereof, these goods
\ncannot fall into general entry covered by Tariff Heading 40.08. In
\nsupport of his submissions, Mr. Venkataramani relied upon Chapter
\nNote 2(e) of Chapter 40 and submitted that any goods which falls
\nwithin any of the Tariff Items in Chapter 90 gets excluded from
\nChapter 40.\n<\/p>\n
\tWe find substance in the submission of Mr. Venkataramani.
\nChapter Note 1(a) of Chapter 94 excludes cushions falling in Chapter\n<\/p>\n
40.  At the same time, Chapter Note 2(e) of Chapter 40 excludes
\narticles which would fall in Chapter 90.  Thus, one would have to see
\nwhich of the Tariff Headings, in these two Chapters, specifically deals
\nwith goods of the type manufactured by Respondents.  If the goods
\nwere mere cushions they may get covered by Chapter 40 and would
\nthen be excluded from Chapter 90.  However, if the goods are a seat
\nor a part thereof they get specifically covered by Tariff Heading 94.01.
\nIn such cases, by virtue of Chapter Note 2(e) to Chapter 40, these
\ngoods get excluded from Chapter 40.  Between Tariff Headings 94.01
\nand 40.08, Tariff Item 94.01 is a more specific heading dealing with
\nseats and parts thereof.  It is an admitted position that the goods
\nmanufactured by the Respondents are cut in the shape of seats and
\nare used only in seats. They are thus cushions of seats and are parts
\nof seats. They then fall under Tariff Heading 94.01 and Tariff Heading
\n40.08 thus get excluded.  This view is also supported by H.S.N.
\nExplanatory Note, which states that Tariff Entry 94.01 would cover all
\nseats including seats of vehicles.\n<\/p>\n
\tIt must, however, be stated that seats of two wheelers get
\nexcluded from Chapter 94 by virtue of Chapter Note 1(h), which reads
\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n
“1. This Chapter does not cover:\n<\/p>\n
……………………………………….
\n……………………………………….\n<\/p>\n
(h)\tArticles of heading No.87.14.”\n<\/p>\n
Chapter Note 87.04 specifically deals with parts of two wheelers.
\nTherefore, seats of two wheelers would fall under Tariff Heading 87.14.\n<\/p>\n
\tMr. Jain next relied upon Chapter Note 2 to Chapter 94 (which
\nhas been set out hereinabove).  He submitted that Tariff Heading
\n94.01 would only cover seats which have been designed for placing on
\nthe floor or on the ground or which could be hung or fixed on the wall
\nor designed to stand one on the other.  He submitted that seats of cars
\nare not designed to be placed on the floor or ground and therefore
\nthey would not be covered under Tariff Heading 94.01.  We are unable
\nto accept this submission.  The term `floor or ground’ would also
\ninclude floor of the car or vehicle.  Seats made for vehicles are placed
\non the floor of the car or vehicle.  Therefore, Chapter Note 2 would not
\nexclude seats of vehicles.  This also finds support from H.S.N.
\nExplanatory Notes.\n<\/p>\n
\tReliance was also sought to be placed, by Mr. Jain, on Chapter
\nNote 9 of Chapter 40 which has been reproduced hereinabove.  In our
\nview, this Chapter Note does not in any way assist the Respondents.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn the above view, it will have to be held that the impugned
\nJudgment cannot be sustained.\n<\/p>\n
 Before we part one other aspect must be mentioned.  As stated
\nabove, earlier Judgments of the Tribunal in the case of J. K. Foam
\nProducts vs. C.C.E, Kanpur, reported in 1997 (94) ELT 497 and
\nC.C.E, Coimbatore vs. Ajay Rubber, reported in 1998 (100) ELT
\n478, were cited.  These Judgments are directly on the point. It has
\nbeen held that such goods are classifiable under Tariff Heading 94.01.
\nThese being Judgments of coordinate Benches were binding on the
\nTribunal.  Judicial discipline required that the Tribunal follow those
\nJudgments.  If the Tribunal felt that those Judgments were not correct,
\nit should have referred the case to a larger Bench. The Judgment in
\nthe case of C.C.E., Madras vs. M. M. Rubber Co. Ltd., Madras<\/a>,
\nreported in 1984 (15) ELT 198, was based on the then Tariff Items
\n16A and 34A.  Those Tariff Items were completely different. That
\nJudgment has no relevance to the question under consideration.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn the above view, the impugned Judgment is set aside.  It is
\nheld that the goods of the Respondents would fall under Tariff Heading
\n94.01.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe Appeals are accordingly allowed.  There will, however, be no
\norder as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Collector Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005 Author: S N Variava Bench: S.N.Variava, Dr.Ar.Lakshmanan, S.H.Kapadia CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 3832-3837 of 1999 PETITIONER: Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur RESPONDENT: M\/s Matador Foam & Ors. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05\/01\/2005 BENCH: S. N. Variava, Dr. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-263325","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nCollector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-01-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-19T20:13:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Collector Of Central Excise, … vs M\\\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-01-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-19T20:13:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005\"},\"wordCount\":1533,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005\",\"name\":\"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\\\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-01-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-19T20:13:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Collector Of Central Excise, … vs M\\\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-01-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-19T20:13:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Collector Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005","datePublished":"2005-01-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-19T20:13:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005"},"wordCount":1533,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005","name":"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-01-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-19T20:13:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-matador-foam-ors-on-5-january-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Collector Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S Matador Foam & Ors on 5 January, 2005"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263325","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=263325"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263325\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=263325"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=263325"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=263325"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}