SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
G. Sankaran, Jyoti Balasundaram, JJ.
Essel Packaging Ltd. -Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise -Respondent
Order Nos. 587-589/90-C Appeal Nos. E/265/85-C 239/88-C 2215/89-C, 587- of 1990, 589 of 1990, E/265 of 1985, 239 of 1988, 2215 of 1989
Decided On : 12-06-1990

Advocates Appeared:
J.S. Aggarwal,M.S. Arora

ORDER

Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)

1. These appeals relate to the classification of 3-ply, 5-ply and 7-ply laminated film and plastic multi laminated collapsible tubes. All 3 appeals involve common issues and are hence disposed of by this common order.

2. E/A 265/85-C : This appeal relates to the classification and rate of duty applicable to 3-ply laminated film, 5-ply laminated film, 7-ply laminated film and plastic collapsible multi-laminated tubes obtained from 7-ply laminated film. The facts of the case are that the appellants filed classification list 22/84 w.e.f. 2-8-1984 for the classification of the above mentioned products. A show cause notice was served upon them,

(1) alleging that 7-ply laminated film and collapsible tubes being composite articles are not eligible for exemption under Notification 182/82, CE dated 11-5-1982.

(2) seeking to classify 5-ply laminated films under T.I. 27 (7). No question was raised regarding classification of 3-ply laminates. The appellants replied that 5-ply and 7-ply laminated films are known as such in the trade and never known as aluminium foil and hence they cannot be classified under T.I. 27 (7), that aluminium foil is covered on both sides with plastic material and hence it cannot be held that aluminium foil has been backed by either paper or any other reinforcing material, and that all the items are eligible for the benefit of Notn. 182/82 CE dated 11-5-1982 as they are all known as plastic articles.

(3) After adjudication the Asst. Collector passed an order in May 1985 classifying

(a) 3-ply and 7-ply laminated film and plastic collapsible tubes under T.I. 68 but denying the benefit of Notn. 182/82 C.E., dated 11-5-1982 on the ground that these items are not solely made out of material falling under T.L 15A (i);

(b) in respect of 5-ply laminate he held that it is an intermediate product in continuous process without removal and is not liable to duty under T.I. 27 (7). He however, held that, if at any stage it is found to be removed from the machine, it will attract duty under T.I. 27 (7);

(c) as regards 3-ply laminate, he also held that if the product is used internally for manufacture of collapsible tubes, it will be exempted under Notn. 118/75.

(4) In appeal, the Collector classified collapsible tubes under T.I. 68 denying the benefit of Notn. 182/82 on the ground that they were composite articles. He classified 3-ply and 7-ply laminates under T.I. 68 and upheld the claim for eligibility to benefit of Notn. 118/75 as they are used in the factory of production.

(5) E/A 239/88-C - The classification of 7-ply laminated sheets is in dispute in this appeal.

The facts of this case are as follows :-

The appellants filed classification list 22/84 for classification of the following products :-

(1) 5/7 ply laminated plastic sheets.

(2) Plastic shoulders for plastic 7-ply multilayer collapsible tubes.

(3) Laminated Collapsible plastic tubes under Tariff Item 68.

They also claimed benefit under Notn. 118/75 dated 30-4-1975 (captive consumption) and Notn. 182/82 dated 11-5-1982 (articles of plastic).

(6) In respect of items 1 and 2, provisional approval was granted and item 3 was classified under T.I. 68 but benefit of Notn. 182/82 was denied. Upon representations by the appellants, the Asst. Collector provisionally approved the classification of item 3 under T.I. 68 permitting clearance under nil rate of duty.

(7) A show cause notice was issued on 1-2-1985 for proposed classification of

(1) 3 ply laminate emerging as extrudate LDPE intermediate product and becoming 5-ply laminate under T.I. 27 (7) as aluminium foil.

(2) 7-ply plastic laminated collapsible tubes under T.I. 68 and disentitling them from the benefit of Notn. 182/82 as tubes contained aluminium, paper etc. A corrigendum was issued for proposed classification of 3-ply laminate under T.I. 68.

(8) The Asst. Collector passed an order in May 1985 classifying

(1) 3-ply laminate under T.I. 68 and eligible to ben

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top