9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (1) TMI 313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used by them for making C.P. 3 coating used in the manufacture of layer flat cells. 2. It is not disputed that in the year 1967-68 the question was raised as to the precise use of Toluol brought by the respondents under Chapter X. The then Deputy Chief Chemist examined the produce and reported C.P. 3 coating is not similar to that of a normal paint or varnish sold in the market nor its function is that of paint and varnish, hence it cannot be identified as paint or varnish . The question about the character of C.P. coating manufactured by the respondents out of Toluol was again raised in 1977. Test report of the then Deputy Chief Chemist dated 14-10-1980 was that thus from the mode of manufacture of the product, its application as a coa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave been taken from Notification No. 53/73 dated 1-3-1973 which exempts to some extent certain mineral oil products used as thinner or diluent for the manufacture of paints etc. including allied materials. Only because the term allied materials occurred in this exemption notification, it is doubtful if the product of the applicants which is stated to be bearing some similarity to paint can be treated as other than chemical formulations. The question involved in this appeal is whether the C.P. 3 compound manufactured by the appellants is a chemical formulation as mentioned in exemption Notification No. 276/67 dated 21-12-1967 or a formulation other than chemical. Since two Chemical Test Reports had specifically stated that this product is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... binder resin and the rest volatile solvents mainly Toluol. He thus urges that Toluol is used not only as a diluent but, also as a thinner during actual coating operation to make up the loss of the solvent due to evaporation to adjust viscosity and maintain the consistency. From the stated use of the Toluol it cannot be inferred that this is a chemical formulation. None of the ingredients like carbon particles, binding agent like resin and solvent present in the product are capable of functioning as chemicals by themselves or the combinations as a whole. It has, therefore, been urged that the benefit of Notification No. 276/67-C.E., dated 21-12-1967 would not be available to the respondents. Hence the prayer that the impugned order be set as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said authorities. The Deputy Chief Chemist s Report of 1980 relied upon by the departmental authorities to upset the practice prevalent in 1967 is also not categorical so as to call for any change and it has been adequately discussed in the impugned order. He, therefore, submits that the appeals deserve to be dismissed. 5. We have carefully considered the pleas advanced on both sides. We agree with the lower appellate authority and the unrebutted evidence brought on record by the respondents learned advocate. No doubt is left that the C.P. 3 coating manufactured by the respondents is clearly a chemical formulation and, therefore the Toluol has been rightly extended the benefit of Notification No. 276/67-C.E. The Test Report relied up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
