1983 (11) TMI 298 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeals.
2. Applicability of Section 35F in appeals made on behalf of the Department.
3. Classification of goods under the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis:
1. The Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, filed two appeals against the Order-in-Appeal allowing the respondents' appeals, disputing the classification of goods as conveyor belting under Item 68 instead of Item 22. The appeals were initially adjourned for the respondents to file cross-objections, and a delay in filing was raised due to documents being lost in transit. The Departmental Representative requested condonation of the delay, which was opposed by the respondents' counsel.

2. The respondents' counsel argued against the admission of appeals, suggesting that Section 35F should apply to the Department as an appellant, similar to when the appellant is an assessee. However, the Tribunal clarified that Section 35F pertains to duty demanded or penalty levied on goods not under central excise authorities' control, which does not apply when the Department is the appellant. The Tribunal highlighted that Section 35F does not require the department, as the adjudicating authority, to deposit amounts in question.

3. The Tribunal, after resolving the delay issue, proceeded to consider the classification of goods under the Central Excise Tariff. Both parties agreed that the issue was previously addressed in another appeal involving the same manufacturer and product. The Tribunal referred to their earlier decision, holding that the goods were correctly classifiable under Item 68. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the Collector (Appeals) orders and dismissed the appeals filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, upholding the classification under Item 68.

This judgment clarifies the process of condonation of delay in filing appeals, the inapplicability of Section 35F to Departmental appeals, and the correct classification of goods under the Central Excise Tariff, providing a detailed analysis of each issue raised during the proceedings.