9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (3) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r : 3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various items falling under Chapters 19, 54 and 63 of the CETA in their factory. They filed classification list No. 49/91-92 w.e.f. 25-7-1991 in respect of their products on account of the change in duty structure vide Notification No. 53/91-C.E., dated 25-7-1991. They classified the disputed product, HDPE woven sacks under sub-heading 6301.00 of the CETA and the same was approved by the Assistant Collector vide order dated 31-8-1991. This order was, however, challenged by the Revenue before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) who set aside the same and accepted the review application of the Revenue and observed that the HDPE woven sacks were classifiable under sub-heading 3923 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed counsel is not liable to be accepted being wholly misconceived and devoid of any lgal force. No doubt, the appellants filed the classification No. 49/91-92 on 25-7-1991 wherein they classified the product in question along with other products with which we are not concerned under sub-heading 6301.00 of the CETA and the Assistant Collector approved the same vide order dated 31-8-1991 but said order was never accepted by the Revenue and it was challenged by filing a review application before the Collector (Appeals) and that the Collector (Appeals) had reversed that order through the impugned order and directed the classification of the product in question of the appellants under sub-heading 3923.90 of the CETA. Therefore, it cannot be lega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se Customs issued on circular, dated 24-9-1992 wherein it was clarified that the product HDPE woven sacks would be henceforth classified under sub-heading 3920.32 of the Tariff as earlier there was lack of uniformity in the classification of the product. But the contention of the counsel that by the order of the Collector(Appeals) this circular has been given retrospective effect by classifying the appellants product in question under sub-heading 3923.90 from the date on which the classification list was filed by them is again wholly misplaced and misconceived. Even earlier to the issuance of the Board s circular, the position was very clear and the HDPE woven sacks were classificable under this very sub-heading No. 3923.90 of the Tariff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... department while challenging the order of the Assistant Collector who classified the product of the appellants under sub-heading 6301.00 of the schedule to the Tariff, requested the Collector (Appeals) for setting aside that classification being contrary to the clarification issued by the Board through circular dated 24-9-1992 and the law laid down by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Rajpack Well case, supra. The Collector (Appeals) rightly accepted their prayer and set aside the order of the Assistant Collector. 11. Similarly, the ratio of the law laid down by the Apex Court in C.C.E., Baroda v. Cotspun Ltd., supra is not of any help to the appellants in this case. In that case the Apex Court has observed that differential duty cannot b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
