9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (2) TMI 226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Rs. 38,308.24. The appeals were argued together by the respective sides and are disposed of by this common order. 2. Shri P.R. Ravi, Deputy General Manager (Accounts) of the appellants Company submits on their behalf that MODVAT credit has been claimed by them in respect of kraft paper required by them in the manufacture of their final product, coated Abrasives. They receive the input materials from different sources. The kraft paper that they require is of 120 GSM. They had declared the tariff classification of their inputs in question as 4804.19 which covers paper of a substance 65 gm per sq/m or more. They received most of their supplies of the required materials showing this tariff classification. But in the case of one supplier t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefit if what they have received is another product with another classfication. He cited the Tribunal decision in Indian Hume and Pipe Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore - 1995 (57) ECR 344 where tariff classification 25.02 furnished by the appellants therein for the input material, cement was not considered specific enough. MODVAT credit was held to be not admissible to them. They had not filed variety wise declaration with the appropriate tariff sub-heading as they were bringing in Port Land Cement falling under 2502.20 and also Sulphate Resistant Cement falling under sub-heading 2502.90. Shri Ghosh, submitted that the department s case in the present appeals are on stronger ground as the appellants had chosen to show ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame. The Tribunal also observed that the input suppliers are not under the control of the appellants and as long as appropriate description of the input materials have been correctly given in the declaration, MODVAT credit would be admissible. Applying the ratio of the above decision to the present case and taking into account the facts involved in the present appeals, I find that the tariff classification 4804.29 shown in the gate pass in question is inconsistent with the description of the goods, kraft paper GSM 120. This would support the plea taken on behalf of the appellant that there was an apparent error in the tariff classification at the hands of the officer-in-charge of the factory of the suppliers. Such an error, however, did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... way of denial of MODVAT would arise. Going by the GSM criterion, the Kraft paper has to be taken as falling under Tariff sub-heading 4804.19 which was what was stated by the appellants in their declaration. I also take note of the clarification given by Shri Ravi in reply to the stand taken by Shri Ghosh regarding Kraft Paper and Kraft Liner Paper that they require only Kraft Paper and they had declared the same. Both the Tariff sub-headings in question cover Kraft Paper, the difference being only in grammage. No objection has been taken by the authorities below applying any difference between Kraft Paper and Kraft Liner Paper. The objection taken was only because of Tariff Sub-heading. This has been considered already and found to be not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
