2012 (6) TMI 558

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ommissioner (Appeals) – Held that:- Since the disputed issue stands decided in favour of the respondents by several decisions of the Tribunal in MUL DENTPRO PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., VAPI [2007 (8) TMI 150 (Tri)], ALFA PACKAGING Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., VAPI [2010 (10) TMI 400 (Tri)] find no merits in the Revenue s appeal – against revenue. - E /928/2004 - - - Dated:- 2-5-2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the assessee s stand. The said decision is based upon the test report of the Chemical Examiner, Customs House, Chennai, and The Central Revenue Control Laboratory, New Delhi, opining that Ponds Oil Control Face Wash has passed the test satisfying the conditions specified in Note 3 to Chapter 34 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. Accordingly, he has upheld the order of the lower authority and rejec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... classifiable under Chapter Sub-heading 3402.90 as claimed by the assesses and not under 33.04 as claimed by the Revenue. 4. Apart from the fact that the disputed issue has been decided in the same assessee s case, we also take note of another decision of the Tribunal in the case of Mul Dentpro Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Vapi - 2007 (218) ELT 435 (Tri.-Ahm.) , allowing Pears Face Wash is properly class .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X