9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... show cause notices. In reply they claimed that their goods were not impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics and varnish. They claimed that their goods were coated with resins which were not plastic. They contended that resins are a different item from plastic and therefore they were entitled to the benefit of the Notification. Their contention has not been accepted by any of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stoms, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (in short "CEGAT") New Delhi, dated 22nd March, 2000. 2. The question is whether the Appellants are entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 52/86, dated 10th February, 1986. This Notification granted exemption from duty in respect of goods specified in the Schedule thereto. Item No. 11 of the Schedule reads as follows :- Sl. No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and therefore they were entitled to the benefit of the Notification. Their contention has not been accepted by any of the authorities including CEGAT. 4. Before us it was also sought to be submitted that resins are different from plastic. In our view, it is not necessary to go into the question whether resins are different from plastics. The classification list filed by the Appellants describes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red, or laminated with plastics or varnished 7014.00 KG (a) Unvarnished fibre glass cloth/Volan Silane treated glass cloth (b) Unvarnished fibre glass tape 7014.00 MTR 5. Thus, for the purposes of classification and for the purposes of falling under Tariff Item No. 7014, the Appellants themselves have shown their goods to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
