Harish Chander, Member (J)

1. The Collector of Central Excise, Rajkot has filed an appeal being aggrieved from Order-in-Appeal No. E-l1460-1461/AHD-76-77/83 dated 30th August, 1983 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.

2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee manufactures 'Adhesive Plaster B.P.C.' and declared the same as non-excisable in classification list dated 8-12-1970 which was approved on 19-12-1971 by the then Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Jamnagar. While filing the classification list dated 2nd January, 1983 the same product was also declared as non-excisable by the assessee but the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Jamnagar approved the same under Item No. 60 of Central Excise Tariff as Adhesive Tapes all sorts. The assessee had filed an appeal before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay and the said case was remanded back for denovo adjudication. Meanwhile the said manufacturer had also challenged the said classification before Honourable Civil Judge, Rajkot by filing Civil, Suit which was dismissed in January, 1976. Thereafter, the Superintendent, Central Excise Rajkot issued two Show Cause Notices for recovery of duty on two products namely Adhesive Tapes (i.e. Adhesive Plaster B.P.C.) and Corn Tapes vide Show Cause Notices No. V.60/Case/1/76 dated 3-4-1976 and No. V.14E/ Case-1/76 respectively for the period from 19-5-71 to 31-1-1976 and 26-3-1971 to 31-1-1976. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Jamnagar confirmed the demands under his order dated 19-10-76. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order the assessee had filed an appeal before the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Bombay. The same was rejected vide order dated 17-12-76. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order the assessee filed a revision application which was also rejected by the Government of India vide order dated 31-3-78. Thereafter the assessee filed a Special Civil Application in the High Court of Gujarat and Government's order was set aside on the question of applicability of rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Government of India filed S.L.P. before the Supreme Court and the case was remanded to the Gujarat High Court for consideration of applicability of rule 10A. It was in this context while deciding Special Civil Application No. 899/78, the Order-in-Appeal No. 2097/76 dated 23-11-76 was remanded for denovo consideration. The assessee did not challenge validity of rule 10A on account of decision given on classification of identical product under Tariff Item 68 by the Central Board of Excise and Customs vide Order No. 29/81 dated. 31-8-1981. The appeal bearing No. V-2(60)-1017/83 was filed by the assessee as per observations of the High Court of Gujarat. The learned Appellate Collector of Central Excise had held that Adhesive Plaster manufactured by the respondents are drugs as per the Drug Control Act and these were manufactured according to the Pharmacopoeia specifications under the licence granted by the Drug Control Authority. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay therefore, held that Adhesive Plaster Porofix B.P.C. U.S.P. manufactured by the assessee were classifiable under Item No. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order the revenue has come in appeal before the Tribunal.

3. Shri A.S. Sundar Rajan, the. learned J.D.R. has appeared on behalf of the appellants. He has reiterated the facts. He has pleaded that the products manufactured by the respondents falls under Tariff Item 60 (Adhesive Tapes all sorts not elsewhere specified. Shri Sundar Rajan states that the respondent's claim is that the same falls under Tariff Item 68. He also argued that he does not propose that the product in dispute falls under Tariff Item 14E. Shri Sundar Rajan states that Tariff Item 60 is very specific and relates to Adhesive Tapes, all sorts, not elsewhere specified, including cellulose adhesive tape, and paper bag adhesive