9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (6) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... waiver of pre-deposit of duty we take up the appeals itself today for disposal on merits. 2.The appeals are directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Trichy, dated 22-12-1994. 3. Shri Sampath, the learned Counsel, submitted that the appellants are manufacturing lacquered laminated/printed films out of plain films purchased from outside and were clearing them by claiming exemption in terms of Notification Nos. 53/88 dated 1-3-1988 and 14/92 dated 1-3-1992 under S. Nos. 35 30 respectively. The period involved is 21-6-1991 to 20-2-1993. Proceedings were instituted against the appellant on the ground that the appellant would not be eligible to the benefit of the said notifications inasmuch as the appellants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade between a manufacturer who in an integrated way manufactures the goods in question out of the raw materials of plastics in primary form and a manufacturer who does not have a facility for such an integrated manufacturing process but instead purchase the intermediate goods namely films from the market and then subjects the same to processes of lacquered lamination and printing. The learned Counsel in this connection referred to the clarification of the Board which is also referred to in the Ahmedabad Collectorate s Trade Notice No. 155/90 which is also referred to in the order of the original authority. Shri Sampath further submitted that in a similar matter which came up before the Bench by reason of the authority not considered the Boa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erent view cannot be taken at this stage with reference to the nature of the goods. 6. We have considered the submissions made before us. The short issue for our consideration in the present appeals is whether the Board s Circular which is a relevant piece of record available on record has been taken note of by the lower appellate authority in the impugned order or not. With reference to applicability of the notification, the Board gave a clarification which has been referred to in the Trade Notice of Ahmedabad Collectorate referred to above. For purposes of clarification, we extract the same hereunder :- A question has been raised as to whether the exemption Notification No. 53/88-C.E., dated 1-3-1988 be amended in order to extend the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tification in question and also within the meaning of the Tariff Heading 39.20 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the lower appellate authority for reconsideration of the issue afresh in accordance with law after affording the appellants a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 7. [Assent per : V.P. Gulati, Member (T)]. - I observe that the appellants have sought for the benefit of Notifications 53/88, dated 1-3-1988 and 14/92, dated 1-3-1992 claiming that their goods should be deemed to have been manufactured out of materials falling under Headings 39.01 to 39.15 notwithstanding the fact that the same were in fact manufactured by the appellants out of films falling under Headi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
