9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 577X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the goods i.e. polyester laminated with aluminium and further laminated with polythene in roll form should not be classified under sub-heading 3920.30 of the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act and the said goods in pouch form under 3923.90 and accordingly differential duty was demanded from them. The case was adjudicated by the AC who confirmed the demand of Rs. 7,88,592/- and classified the aluminium foils laminated on both sides with plastic under sub-heading 3920.39 during February, 1999 and under sub-heading 3923.90 from March, 1999 onwards. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assistant Commissioner but on quantification of duty he directed the appellant to submit a detailed statement to show the duty liability to low ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise Bombay v. Tender Care International [1998 (104) E.L.T. 424 (Tribunal)] Where it was held that air bubble ratio cushion films used specifically for packing of goods classifiable under sub-heading 39.23 of Central Excise Tariff Act as packing material and not under sub-heading 3920.38 as laminated plastic films. (2) Metlex (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi [2004 (165) E.L.T. 129 (S.C.)] Where it was held that laminating/metallising of duty paid film not amounts to manufacture - product is a film to start with and remains a film after lamination or metallisation and no new and distinct product comes into existence. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. The only issue contested before us is the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partment had proposed the classification of Aluminium foil laminated on both sides with plastic films under Chapter Heading 3920 on the basis of Board's Circular No. 461/27/99, dated 11-6-1999. The referred classification was set aside by CEGAT vide Order No. 59/02, dated 12-2-2002 classifying the product under Chapter Heading 7607. Department's appeal against this order was set aside by the Supreme Court in C.A. No. 5148/02 on 24-2-2003 [2003 (157) E.L.T. A35 (S.C.)] on the ground that the Department did not file appeal against the CEGAT order in the case of Indian Foils Limited, Calcutta. The judgment of the Supreme Court has been accepted by the Board and it has been decided by the Board that classification of aluminium foil laminated o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
