2000 (8) TMI 154 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in Revenue appeals.
2. Classification of 'printed wrapper' under Central Excise Tariff.

Condonation of Delay:
The judgment addresses the Revenue's application for condonation of a 5-day delay in filing the appeals. The delay is considered marginal, and the Tribunal allows the condonation by granting the Condonation of Delay application. Subsequently, both appeals are taken up for consideration due to the issue's brevity.

Classification of 'Printed Wrapper':
The primary issue in the judgment revolves around the classification of a 'printed wrapper' under the Central Excise Tariff. The dispute arises regarding whether the product should be classified as a product of the printing industry under sub-heading 4901.90 or as a product primarily intended for packing under sub-heading 4823.90. The Commissioner's decision, based on a Tribunal judgment in the assessee's case, classifies the product under sub-heading 4901.90. This classification is supported by the Section Note 2 to Section VII and Note 11 to Chapter 48 of the Central Excise Tariff.

The Revenue challenges this classification, citing judgments from the Apex Court and previous cases, arguing for classification under sub-heading 4823.90. However, the Tribunal, after considering the arguments from both sides, upholds the Commissioner's classification under sub-heading 4901.90. The Tribunal emphasizes that the Commissioner's decision aligns with the Tribunal's earlier judgment in a similar case and that the section note and chapter note have binding force for classification purposes.

Upon reviewing the submissions and samples of the products, the Tribunal finds that the printing on the 'printed wrapper' serves to establish a connection with the goods contained inside, aiding customers in making informed choices. The Tribunal concludes that the printing is not merely incidental but integral to the product's purpose, leading to the classification under sub-heading 4901.90. The Tribunal sets aside the orders in the appeals and allows them based on the classification as a product of the printing industry.

In the final analysis, the Tribunal rejects the Revenue's appeals, noting that the Tribunal had thoroughly considered all grounds, including the Apex Court judgment, before arriving at a decision. The Tribunal finds no valid reason to overturn its earlier judgment, emphasizing that the Revenue's disagreement with the Tribunal's decision is insufficient grounds for reversal. Consequently, the appeals filed by the Revenue are rejected based on the Tribunal's earlier judgment and the binding force of the section note and chapter note.