1998 (11) TMI 288 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of offset printing plates under Central Excise Tariff (CET) sub-heading 8442.00 or Chapter Heading 37.05

In this case, the issue revolved around the classification of offset printing plates processed by the respondents. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise classified the exposed offset printing plates under CET sub-heading 8422.00, considering the change in the name, character, and use of the plates after processing. The lower Appellate authority upheld the manufacturing aspect but classified the product under Chapter Heading 37.05. The Department appealed seeking restoration of the classification under CET sub-heading 8442.00.

The learned DR argued that Heading 8442 specifically covers printing plates, and the HSN Explanatory Notes exclude sensitised plates from this heading, classifying them under Heading 37.01. On the other hand, the Advocate for the Respondent contended that the processing involved only exposing unexposed printing plates, which could be reused, and the final product was a photographic film exposed and developed. The Department claimed that sensitising the printing plate was essential for printing purposes, but the Tribunal found no evidence to dispute the Respondent's claim that they received unexposed printing plates for processing.

The Tribunal held that since the respondents received unexposed printing plates and carried out the process of exposure, the appropriate classification would be under Heading 37.05, covering photographic plates and films exposed and developed other than cinematographic films. The Tribunal confirmed the lower authority's classification under Heading 37.05, rejecting the Department's appeal and upholding the Respondent's position based on the factual findings and lack of evidence to the contrary.

In conclusion, the judgment focused on the proper classification of offset printing plates processed by the respondents, emphasizing the distinction between sensitised plates and unexposed printing plates. The Tribunal's decision relied on the factual position that the processing involved exposing unexposed plates, leading to the emergence of a photographic film, supporting the classification under Heading 37.05. The judgment highlighted the importance of factual evidence and interpretation of relevant tariff headings in determining the correct classification for excise duty purposes.