Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1999 (8) TMI 687

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 830/CE/Dlh/94 dt. 1-12-94 2. Briefly stated the facts are that all the three appellants manufacture Rice Rubber Rolls which are used in Rice Mill as part of dehusking machinery. Under the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff, the Central Board of Excise and Customs, in exercise of its appeal powers, classified the product under Tariff Item 16 A(3) and not under Item 68. After introduction of present Central Excise Tariff, the Assistant Collector classified the impugned product under sub-heading 4016.99 which was set aside by Collector (Appeals) who classified the product under sub-heading 4009.99 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act and also extended the benefit of Notification No. 197/67. The Assistant Collector, however, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion rests upon the basic functions/character of the product; that rubber rolls are neither by nature nor by function are pipes or tubes; these are used for dehusking paddy by slippering them on to rollers for dehusking machinery; that H.S.N. Explanatory Notes under Heading 4016 and Note 1(a) to Section XVI make it clear that other articles for technical uses (including parts and accessories of machine and appliances of Section XVI) fall under Heading 40.16 and other articles of a kind used in machinery or mechanical or electrical appliances or for other technical uses of unhardened vulcanised rubber (falling under Heading 40.16) are excluded from Section XVI. He also relied upon the decision in the case of Kohinoor Rubber Mills [1993 (67) E .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... earlier order in Appeal No. 876-879, dt. 21-8-91 passed by the Collector (Appeals) classifying the impugned product under sub-heading 4009.99 was not challenged by the Department by filing appeal; that demands for duty were issued in 1991 on the ground that the product was classifiable under 4016.99 which were confirmed by the Assistant Collector on 28-9-92; that the period covered was period from 1-1-91 to 31-1-92; that another show cause notice dt. 2-9-92 was issued separately to each appellants demanding duty for the period from 1-2-92 to 31-7-92; that the Delhi High Court had quashed the Adjudication order dt. 28-9-92. He, further submitted that in the present proceedings, the first show cause notice was issued on 31-1-1994 for revisin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ; that the Assistant Commissioner has dealt with this point in Para (vi) of the Adjudication orders dt. 20-6-94 and the clarificatory order of the Hon ble High Court is in respect of period subsequent to the period covered by show cause notice dt. 2-9-92 i.e. 1-8-92 onwards. He, further, submitted that in case of revision of an approved classification, the date of issue of show cause notice is relevant; that in case of revision of classification list on order from higher Appellate Authority, the date of show cause notice is not relevant; that, therefore, the effective date of change in classification of the impugned product will be the date subsequent to the period involved in the matters which were before the Hon ble High Court in writ pet .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... would not be covered by our decision dated 17th May, 1993. The Hon ble High Court clarified as under :- We, however, clarify that for subsequent period it would be open to the respondent to classify the goods under Heading 4016.99 or under any other Tariff Entry which may be applicable in accordance with law and our decision dated 17th May, 1993 will not come in the way. This is evident from the order of the Hon ble Court that the subsequent period would mean the period subsequent to the period involved in the matter before the High Court - It has been mentioned by the Appellants themselves in Memorandum of Appeals and by the ld. Counsel at the time of hearing before us that the demands upto the period 31-7-92 were subject matter of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates