9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (12) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng under T.I. 68. The appellants contention was that the product in question was manufactured from PTFE Resin - a synthetic Resin - on which additional duty under Section 3 of the CTA, 1975 was paid and the product was an article of plastic. It was also urged that the said diaphragms are manufactured directly by moulding process from PTFE Resin and pin or screw is inserted for holding the diaphragms in its position. Being an article of plastic on the above contentions, the appellants have submitted that it was exempted under Notification 182/82, dated 11-5-1982 since countervailing duty on the moulded resins was already paid. The original authority held the product as falling under Tariff Item 68 as not a plastic article inasmuch as inputs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le a final view will be taken on the first point after discussion in a Tariff Conference, the second point has been clarified vide Board s letter dated 5th June, 1984. Detailed letter follows . 2.1 It may be noted at this stage that the copy of the detailed letter, mentioned in the telegram, mentioned above, had not been produced by the appellants. 2.2 It has also placed reliance on Bombay Collectorate s Trade Notice No. 176/(MP) (UMP)/Plastics all sorts/(3)1979, dated 7-6-1979. This trade notice clarifies the scope of articles made of plastics all sorts under T.I. 15A(2). It is reproduced in full for the sake of proper appreciation :- The question regarding the classification of articles of plastics, made of plastics, all sorts, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apply. He has also pointed out that in Geep Flashlight s case, mentioned supra, the question involved was one of classification under T.I. 15A(2) but in this case the question involved is one of applicability of Notification No. 182/82. The learned representative for the appellant company has also pointed out that the lower appellate authority has not taken into account the affidavits of various dealers indicating the commercial parlance of the product which show in-dubitably that the product under consideration is a plastic article; e.g. affidavit of Shri Mahendra Vinaychand Shah indicates that when a customer asks for a diaphragm, he specifically states whether he wants plastic (PTFE) diaphragm or rubber diaphragms. When the customer ask ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present case is the scope of Notification No. 182/82-C.E., dated 11-5-1982 which is reproduced below :- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 the Central Government hereby exempts articles made of plastics, falling under Item No. 68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon: Provided that - (a) such articles are produced out of artificial resins or plastic materials or cellulose esters and ethers in any form falling under sub-item (1) of Item No. 15A of the said First Schedule on which the duty of excise or the additional duty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t held with reference to the aforesaid Tariff Item as follows :- A mere reference to Tariff Item 15A(2) would show that the articles therein described are plastic materials in different shape and form and not articles made from such plastic material. There is a noticeable difference between plastic material in different shape and form such as tubes, rods, sheets etc. and articles made from such plastic material such as plastic torch. It would be doing violence to language if one were to include plastic torch in articles under Tariff Item 15A(2) on the ground that a plastic tube is used for manufacturing plastic torch. Articles such as tubes, rods, sheets, foils, sticks etc. of plastic material merely describe plastic in different shape a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lly or exclusively made of plastic. The process of manufacture of the product is also like that of any other articles made of plastic i.e. the moulding process. Reliance placed by the learned representative on the citations, mentioned supra in the cases of Indian Organic Chemicals and Eagle Flasks, mentioned supra is quite apt. However, the reliance placed by the appellants on Board s telegram or Trade notice of 1979 is of no help to them, they being in the context of Tariff description under 15A(2), as it stood then. We also notice that the lower appellate authority s finding that the goods are advertised, sold and offered in the market as diaphragm is merely an ipse dixit without any evidence on record. In fact, the affidavit produced by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
