2005 (9) TMI 404 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Denial of concessional rate of duty for stitched paper product under specific notifications.

Analysis:
1. The main issue in the appeal was the denial of the benefit of a concessional rate of duty for the appellant's product, stitched paper, under Notification No. 20/94-C.E. and Notification No. 18/95-C.E. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the assessee's claim of exemption based on the interpretation of the notifications regarding excisable goods falling under specific classifications exempted from excess duty.

2. The Tribunal, after hearing both parties, upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision. It was noted that the paper, along with HDPE fabric, was passed through rollers applying pressure, resulting in the compression of the two materials together. This compression meant that the benefit of the notification was not applicable to the appellant's product. The appeal was deemed to lack merit and was rejected accordingly.

3. The appellant's advocate raised a point regarding the duty being confirmed on the entire realization without extending the benefit of cum-duty, citing precedents like the decision in the case of Srichakra Tyres and the Supreme Court decision in the case of Maruti Udyog Ltd. The Tribunal, acknowledging this submission, remanded the matter back to the original adjudicating authority for requantifying the demand in accordance with the relevant legal principles.

4. Ultimately, the appeal was disposed of based on the above analysis, and the decision was dictated in court for further action.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, the arguments presented by both parties, the interpretation of the relevant notifications, and the Tribunal's decision based on the facts and legal principles involved in the case.