9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (3) TMI 226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T)]. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Calcutta. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondents claimed proforma credit of duty paid on wrapping paper brought from outside for use as wrapping of finished paper reams. The Assistant Collector held that benefit in terms of Rule 56A was not admissible in respect of wrapping pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... behalf of the Revenue the learned Jr. D.R. Shri L.N. Murthy stated that wrapping paper was neither a raw material nor component part of finished paper in the form of reams. He contended that wrapping paper not being in the nature of durable and returnable packing the value of such paper would form a part of the assessable value of the finished paper reams and the benefit of Rule 56A would not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... end Paper Indus. Ltd. reported in 1989 (43) E.L.T. 201 (S.C.). 4. We find that the matter is covered by the Hon ble Supreme Court s decision in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Eastend Paper Indus. Ltd. reported in 1989 (43) E.L.T. 201 wherein it was held that wrapping paper used in wrapping of paper is to be treated as raw material or component for the variety of paper which is packed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wherein the appeal has been preferred and in the petition in appeal to this Court by the revenue under Section 35L(b) of the Act, where the question involved was whether the proforma credit under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 in respect of said packing and wrapping paper used for packing admissible or not is punishable or not, the revenue has pleaded that the unit of paper for sale wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... involved in these appeals is really of academic interest." On the ratio of the Supreme Court s decision referred above, it has to be held that proforma credit under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was admissible to the respondents in respect of packing and wrapping paper used for packing reams of paper manufactured for sale. 5. In view of the above discussion the appeal is rejected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
