2002 (12) TMI 476

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r : Krishna Kumar, Member (J)]. Arguing the case for the applicants the learned Advocate Shri J.C. Patel, submitted that the applicants are engaged in the manufacture of Containers made of papers falling under sub-heading 4819.12 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 which were chargeable to Central Excise duty at the rate of 35% ad valorem at the relevant time but the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... riff Notification 67/82 which provided effective rate of 15% ad valorem and reduction of 10% ad valorem. 2. The learned Counsel has drawn our attention to the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) at page 52 wherein the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the appellants manufacture Composite Containers and for their final product, the LDPE coated paper is the Base Paper out of whic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re demand of duty. 3. Shri M.H. Sheikh, learned JDR appearing on behalf of the Revenue contended that it is the base paper for the manufacture of the Composite Containers which entitled the applicants to avail the benefit of the notification in question. Since the applicants have used LDPE coated paper for the manufacture of the final product, they are not covered within the purview of the said .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X