1989 (9) TMI 278 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Correct classification of paper-based decorative laminated sheets for Central Excise purposes.
2. Refund claims related to the classification of the product.
3. Adjudication of the revised classification lists submitted by the appellants.

Summary:

Issue 1: Correct Classification of Paper-Based Decorative Laminated Sheets
The central issue in these appeals is the correct classification of paper-based decorative laminated sheets for Central Excise purposes. Initially, the product was classified under T.I. 68. With the introduction of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, manufacturers sought classification under sub-heading 3920.31 of Chapter 39, which was later contested, with some seeking classification under sub-heading 4818.90 of Chapter 48. The Tribunal, following precedents such as the Melamine Fibre Board Ltd. case and the Amit Polymers case, held that the product should be classified under sub-heading 4818.90 until 28-2-1988 and under sub-heading 4823.90 from 1-3-1988. The Tribunal emphasized that the paper content in the product was more by weight than the resin, and the essential character of the product was that of paper, not plastic.

Issue 2: Refund Claims
Several appellants filed refund claims for excess duty paid based on the revised classification. For instance, M/s. Label Laminates filed a refund claim for Rs. 40,89,823.77 for the period from 5-3-1986 to 27-8-1986, which was initially rejected by the Assistant Collector but later remanded for reconsideration by the Collector (Appeals). The Tribunal directed the Assistant Collector to decide the refund claims in light of the revised classification under sub-heading 4818.90 and subsequently under sub-heading 4823.90.

Issue 3: Adjudication of Revised Classification Lists
The appeals also involved the adjudication of revised classification lists submitted by the appellants. For instance, M/s. Meghdoot Laminart Pvt. Ltd. initially classified their product under sub-heading 3920.31 but later sought reclassification under sub-heading 4818.90. The Assistant Collector rejected this, and the Collector (Appeals) upheld the rejection. The Tribunal, however, set aside these orders, directing that the product be classified under sub-heading 4818.90 until 28-2-1988 and under sub-heading 4823.90 thereafter. Similar directions were given in other appeals involving manufacturers like M/s. Milton Laminates Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Decent Laminates (P) Ltd., and others.

Final Order:
The Tribunal ordered that the product be classified under sub-heading 4818.90 until 28-2-1988 and under sub-heading 4823.90 from 1-3-1988. Appeals by the manufacturers were allowed, and those by the Revenue were dismissed. Refund claims were to be decided by the Assistant Collectors within three months, providing consequential relief to the appellants as permissible under the Act and Rules.