9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (7) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re manufactured from Polyster Film which are lacquered and that even after lacquering, the products still remained as Polyester Film falling under T.I. 15A(2) CET. They also referred to a Trade Notice (No. 160/82 dated 13-8-1982) issued by the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda and to a letter of the Central Board of Customs & Excise dated 7-4-1984. The Asstt. Collector rejected the arguments and observed that the products in question could not be identified or described as Polyester Film and that these products would not be recognised as Polyester Film in trade parlance as coated polyester. The three end product have a specific name, characteristics and use. He held that the raw material (Polyester Film) having been subjected to manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut by Dr. S.P. Patnis, as acknowledged authority in the field. As such it is difficult to endorse the view of the Assistant Collector that the raw materials has not undergone any process of lacquering and that the polyester films has become a new product under 68. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is accordingly allowed. The order of the Asstt. Collector appealed against is set aside with the directions to classify the products under 15A(2) with the benefit of Notification No. 231/82, as amended." 4. Aggrieved by the Collector's order, the Revenue filed the present appeal before us. Smt. J.K. Chander, JDR argued that the products are really photographic film and, therefore, lost their identity as polyester film coated or lacquer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll be chargeable to duty again under Item 15A(2) after the amendment of T.I. 15A(2) in the budget of 1982-83. Item 15A(2) after the amendment reads as follows :-
"Boards, sheeting, sheets and films, whether lac Fifty per cent ad quered or metallised or laminated or not; lay flat tubings valorem."
not containing any textile material.
7. Taking into consideration the wording of the Tariff and keeping in view the test reports of the Assistant Chemical Examiner, Central Excise, Baroda and the other evidence placed before us, including the affidavit of Dr. S.P. Potnis and considering all facts, we hold that the impugned goods are correctly classifiable under T.I. 15A(2) of the CET. We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
