Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1984 (4) TMI 166

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed the goods as Ribbon VS 6585 Pa 5 900 870 000 (steel reinforced paper) . Item 17(2) Central Excise Tariff at the material time read as under :- 17.(2) Paperboard and all other kinds of paper (including paper or paperboards which have been subjected to various treatments such as coating, impregnating, corrugation, creeping and design printing), not elsewhere specified. 2. During the hearing of the appeal today, the appellants showed us a sample of the Ribbon in question. It was in the form of a narrow strip of paper in length. The appellants stated that it contained three steel wires, and six silk threads. They argued that steel wires and silk threads could by no means be regarded as components of paper and the goods were not paper .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a statement at the bar that these documents did relate to such CV duty and that, if given time, they would furnish copies of other connected correspondence to substantiate their plea. 3. The Department s Representative conceded that the Ribbon in question was not a cartridge paper but nevertheless he maintained that the scope of Central Excise Tariff Item 17, Paper .......... all sorts ........... and particularly of sub-item 17(2), all other kinds of paper ............, not elsewhere specified was wide enough to cover the present goods. He argued that Item 17(2) Central Excise Tariff covered composite papers also so long as the paper content predominated. In the case of Golden Paper Udyog [1983 E.L.T. 1123 (CEGAT)], this Bench had .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t for the issue now before us, we reproduce the same below :- 13. We have carefully considered the arguments advanced on both sides. It is true that the goods contained as much as 60% of paper by value and also that as imported they are in the form of a ribbon which looks much like a paper strip. It is also true that the appellants themselves have several times used the word paper while describing the article, although they have qualified this by stating that it is reinforced with steel wires and silk threads. We have, however, carefully examined the sample of the articles as imported and in the light of this examination we feel that the expressions used may not be conclusive. This does not appear to be a standard item known and sold i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed earlier that would not justify an incorrect classification, we also observe that the existence of such a long-standing practice shows that even to the Customs authorities generally the goods did not appear to be articles of paper in the usual sense. 15. While, therefore, the matter is not entirely free from doubt, we find considerable justification in the claim of the appellants that the goods would not be covered by Item 45(a) and should, therefore, have been assessed under Item 87 Indian Customs Tariff. In this view, we allow the appeal and direct that consequential relief be granted. It is evident from the above extracts of our earlier order that this Bench held that the Ribbon was neither classifiable as paper under Item 44 I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er, paperboard, paper pulp or cellulose wadding. The scope of the group heading is further widened by Chapter Note 2 of the Customs Tariff Act which states that such articles as paper lace, paper gaskets, moulded or pressed goods of wood pulp and dress patterns are also covered by the heading. As compared to this group heading of the Customs Tariff Act, the scope of Item 17(2) Central Excise Tariff was comparatively a very narrow one as it covered only paper or paperboard, both treated and untreated. It cannot, therefore, be said that any article falling under the group Heading 48.01/21(1) Customs Tariff Act would automatically attract CV duty under Item 17(2) Central Excise Tariff. Accordingly, we uphold the appellants contention that no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates