1) whether the mixture that is obtained from power operated mixing machine and used for printing wax paper and polythylene coated paper would be covered under the definition of printing ink classifiable under chapter sub-heading 315 of Central Excise Tariff and if so the same would be dutiable?

2) as to whether the extended period can be invoked in terms of proviso to Section 11A of the Act for alleged suppression/mis-statement of fact extended to evade payment of duty?

3. As regards the first issue, the Collector rejected the contention of the asssessee that the product is not a printing ink and doesn't get covered under the definition of excisable goods and also that there was no manufacture of the same or the goods have not been sold/saleable in the market. He has held that the noticee has been mixing essential ingredients of printing ink viz. colour solvent and resin in power operated mills and the mixture thus obtained, is used for printing wax paper and polythylene coated paper. Therefore, he has held that the mixture acquires such of the properties defined for printing ink, otherwise it couldn't have been used for printing purpose. He has held that neither colournor resin nor spirit would have been able to print such papers. Further mixing of these three raw materials by power operated sand mill is not a mechanical mixing so that each of the raw materials can again be separated back rather it is a chemical mixing of the raw materials giving rise to a definite identifiable product, which is and which can be used as printing ink. He has held that the addition of additives, so that the product acquires some desirable functional properties is not a must in this process. By supplying emphasis on the addition, of these additives does not make any material change in the identifiable nature of the product. He has further added that the additive may improve the quality or standards are not a must for the product being defined as printing Ink. In view of this reasoning, he has held that the colour mixture prepared by the assessee is nothing but an identifiable product known as printing ink and is covered within the tariff description of sub-heading 3215.00 of Central Tariff Act.

As regards the claim of the assessee is not marketed or marketable; he has held that admittedly this colour mixture is not marketed such because the noticee is not a manufacturer seeking to manufacture and trade in printing ink but certainly it is trading its product in the printed form like printed waxed paper or polyethylene paper. He has held that the marketability of the product thus becomes evident. No doubt there might have been some complaints regarding the quality of printing as has been brought in the defence but his complaint is possible even otherwise. Therefore, he held that the product produced for printing waxed paper by the noticee is excisable and chargeable to Central Excise duty under the said tariff heading.

4. As regard the notification of extended period, he has held that the noticee did not produce any evidence that there was no suppression of fact except about the plea that the Central Excise Officers had visited the factory of the noticee and that the department was aware of the activities of the noticee. He has held that it is found from the records that the noticee was purchasing printing ink as well as making printing ink in the name of colour mixture, unless the Central Excise officers go for specific inquiry regarding