1991 (1) TMI 289 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether mill wrapper qualifies as an unbleached variety of paper under Notification No. 142/81.
2. Whether the term "Kraft Paper" in the notification restricts the exemption only to Kraft Paper.
3. Entitlement to any other relief under different notifications.
4. Whether the demand confirmed in Appeal No. E/162/87 is time-barred.
5. Relief to be granted.

Detailed Analysis:

Point 1: Qualification of Mill Wrapper as Unbleached Variety of Paper
The primary issue is whether mill wrapper qualifies as an unbleached variety of paper under the terms of Notification No. 142/81. The test result provided by the Inspector did not disclose the nature of the paper or the bagasse content. The Assistant Collector's letter and the Chemic? Examiner's report did not provide conclusive evidence regarding the paper's compliance with the notification. The lower authorities focused on the test report stating the sample did not satisfy the definition of Kraft Paper, without considering whether the paper was unbleached or contained the requisite 75% bagasse.

Point 2: Restriction to Kraft Paper
The notification in question exempts "unbleached varieties of paper (Kraft Paper)." The term "varieties" in plural suggests that the exemption is not restricted to Kraft Paper alone. Definitions from IS: 4661-1986 and other sources indicate that mill wrapper paper, being a type of unbleached paper used for wrapping, should qualify under the notification if it meets the bagasse content requirement. The mention of Kraft Paper in parenthesis is illustrative, not restrictive. The interpretation should not render the notification otiose or nugatory. Therefore, mill wrapper, if it meets the bagasse content requirement, should be eligible for the exemption.

Point 3: Entitlement to Other Relief
If the appellants do not meet the bagasse content requirement, they may still be entitled to relief under other notifications, such as Notification No. 62/82-C.E., dated 28-2-1982 (as amended by Notification No. 48/83-C.E., dated 1-3-1983) and Notification No. 46/83-C.E., dated 1-3-1983. The lower authorities did not consider these notifications, and the matter should be remanded for consideration of these potential reliefs.

Point 4: Time-Barred Demand
The duty demand may not survive if the appellants meet the terms of Notification No. 142/81 or other applicable notifications. If not, part of the demand beyond six months would be time-barred, as the proviso to Section 11A was not invoked and the classification list was approved finally.

Point 5: Relief Granted
The appeal is disposed of with the following directions:
- The matter is remanded to determine the bagasse content and grant relief as per Notification No. 142/81.
- If the bagasse content requirement is not met, the Department should consider the applicability of other notifications for set-off.
- Part of the demand may be time-barred if the terms of the notifications are not satisfied.

The judgment emphasizes a broad interpretation of the term "unbleached varieties of paper" and remands the case for further factual determination regarding the bagasse content.