9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (10) TMI 479X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant. Shri Jayachandran, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. This appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal No. 34/2001 (M-II), dt. 23-2-2001 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal on matter being remanded by the Tribunal Vide Final Order No. 337/2000, dt. 7-3-2000. It is the appellants contention that the remand order clearly gave dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t merely carrying on the process of soaking the fibre Board/Hardboard in furnace oil and prima facie it did not bring into existence any new product. There is no chapter note, section note to specify the process to be a process of manufacture. There is no change in subject heading and merely because they carry out the soaking process that by itself prima facie does not make the item a different it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e chapter description. It is contended that there is no change in the process of manufacture of the product. Therefore duty is not leviable. 3. The ld. Counsel further submits that as both the authorities have not considered all these aspects of the matter, the matter can be remanded for de novo consideration by granting waiver of pre-deposit. 4. Appearing on behalf of the Revenue, the ld. DR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el that the process of soaking the item in the furnace oil does not bring into existence any new product. It is for the Revenue to show by producing evidence in the nature of the Trade understanding and about the item being known differently and that the process has brought into existence a new product. There is no mention in the order-in-original regarding any evidence relied by the Revenue. Ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
