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

S.VENKATESAN, HARISH CHANDER, V.P.GULATI
Bakelite Hylam Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.R. Gagrat, Sushma Manchanda,Lakshmikumaran, A.S. Sundar Rajan

ORDER

V.P. Gulati, Member (T)

1. The four appeals under consideration were earlier subject matter of proceedings before the Government of India, in one case by way of revision application and in other three cases by way of review proceedings under Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act as applicable at the relevant time. These now stand transferred as if these were appeals before the Tribunal.

2. The issues involved in these appeals are common and relate to the classification of goods, namely (i) cotton fabric; (ii) paper; and (iii) glass fabric, each impregnated with phenol formaldehyde and described as 'Prepreg' 'C' or 'P' or 'G' respectively. These are intended for making laminated sheets, tubes etc.

3. For the sake of easy reference relevant particulars in regard to these appeals are listed as under :

xxx xxx xxx

In the three appeals allowed by the Appellate Collector, Central Excise and against which the appeal of Revenue is before us, the Appellate Collector took note of the three thermosetting stages of resin during the process of setting and definition of the same as given in the book "Dictionary of Plastics" by JA Wordingham and P. Reboul : 1964 Edition and reproduced

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top