1999 (5) TMI 206

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ese are two appeals filed by the Revenue involving the issue whether the benefit to Notification No. 341/76-Cus., dated 7-4-1976 is available to the goods described as both sides coated multilayered pasted art board . 2. When the matters were called, none of the Respondents were present in spite of notice. We, therefore, heard ld. DR who submitted that Notification No. 341/76-Cus. provided a co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ubmitted that the imported goods have been specifically described as art board and not as paste board or multilayered board. Art board is not specifically mentioned in the Notification No. 341/76-Cus. and accordingly, the Collector (Appeals) should not have allowed the benefit of the Notification to the Respondents. He, finally, submitted that the Collector (Appeals) has also relied upon the decis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l Traders (supra) and the Tribunal held that the main characteristics of Art Board as per its definition is that it is coated on both sides. Coating on both sides can be even on past board and multilayered boards and no restriction has been provided in the definition of multilayered paper board or paste boards that they cannot be coated on both sides. We find that the issue is squarely covered by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X