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

HARISH CHANDER, S.K.BHATNAGAR, K.S.VENKATARAMANI, G.P.AGARWAL, P.K.KAPOOR
Hindustan Packaging Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.A. Dave, V.H. Shah,B.K. Singh

ORDER

Per P.K. Kapoor : In this case the question that arose for consideration was whether "Aluminium Foil backed by paper and polyethylene" was classifiable under Sub-heading 7606.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. 1985 or as "Laminated paper" falling under Sub-heading 4811.29 of the Central Excise Tariff. The matter was originally heard by a two Member Bench. The learned Member who recorded the order held that the matter was covered by the Tribunals order in the case of National Dairy Development Board (hereinafter referred to as NDDB) reported in 1992 (59) ELT 565 in which 'Tetra Pack Asceptic-packaging material" made of paper laminated with aluminium foil and polyethylene was held as classifiable under Sub-heading 4811.90. However, the second Member expressed the view that the matter needed to be referred to a larger Bench since in the case of NDDB the Tribunal had not considered the effect of definition of Toil' given in Note 1 (viii) to Chapter 76 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The point of difference between the two Members was referred by the Hon'ble President to a third Member. Thereafter, having regard to the majority opinion this Larger Bench was constituted by

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