9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (5) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcise, Calcutta IV Division. The appeal dated 19-4-1980 filed by M/s. Ashoke International (P) Ltd. had been dismissed for non-appearance of the appellant on 17-1-1983, but it was restored on 18-5-1984 on which day it was also heard. 2. The trouble arose when the Assistant Collector by his order dated 18-11-1977 ruled that M/s. Ashoke International was required to pay duty for the paper it manufactured. This manufacture is done by subjecting white tissue paper to dyeing. This coloured tissue paper was held by Central Excise to be dutiable and so a demand for Rs. 2,52,159.36 was made. The Assistant Collector said the coloured tissue paper was a new substance falling under Item 17(2) CET. Furthermore, as it was dyed on both sides, it would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are a sterile one because the Assistant Collector says in his order that the party has got a valid Central licence in form L4 bearing No. 2/Paper/64 renewed in the year 1977 for the manufacture of paper falling under Item 17 of the CET . So we need not go further into this subject. 6. The process of manufacture is for the white tissue paper to be passed over a guide roll. Then it passes between two touching rollers, the lower roller having its lower one-third in a dye bath. The lower roller is stained in the dye bath/solution and in its rolling motion, colours the surface of the tissue paper that presses on it. The other reciprocating roller imparts no colour as it does not come into contact with any dye or dye bath. The paper is finishe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate Collector are free of this controversy. Indeed, the Assistant Collector says as the dye is on both sides it does not fall within the purview of converted type of paper as enumerated at Sl. No. 3 of the table annexed to Notification No. 68/76 dated 16-3-1976 (as amended) for the purpose of exemption from duty. There is no doubt that he would have given the exemption but for the fact that he held the paper was dyed on both sides. There is not a word about its unavailability for any other reason. 9. The Appellate Collector says they have claimed exemption under the Notification 68/76 dated 16-3-1976". He further said that here the issue is about giving the exemption". But he too came to the conclusion that as the paper being thin was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
