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

🚨 Important Update for Our Users

We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.

⚠️ This portal will be discontinued soon

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

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2009 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password



 

2009 (9) TMI 755 - AT - Central Excise

Issues:
Classification of impregnated filter paper under chapter heading 4811, Benefit of Notification No. 18/95 and 8/96, Consideration of compression of sheets for exemption eligibility.

Classification of impregnated filter paper under chapter heading 4811:
The case involved the classification of impregnated filter paper under chapter heading 4811. The department issued show cause notices alleging that the impregnated filter paper did not fall under the relevant notifications for exemption. The original authority held that the goods cleared fell under a specific classification and imposed a penalty. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the original authority's order. The Department argued that the goods fell under a different classification based on the Chemical examiner's reports and relevant tariff descriptions.

Benefit of Notification No. 18/95 and 8/96:
The respondents availed the benefit of Notification No. 18/95 and 8/96 for specific periods. The department issued show cause notices challenging the eligibility of the impregnated filter paper for these notifications. The original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) had differing opinions on the applicability of these notifications, leading to the appeal by the Department.

Consideration of compression of sheets for exemption eligibility:
The Tribunal, based on the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, analyzed whether the impregnated filter paper required compression of sheets to be excluded from the exemption notifications. The relevant tariff entries and notifications were examined to determine the eligibility criteria. The respondent argued that mere impregnation did not meet the exclusion criteria specified in the notifications. The Tribunal concluded that the products did not meet the specific requirement of having sheets compressed together for exclusion, thus upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) decision.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the appeal filed by the Department, affirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the classification and eligibility for exemption notifications. The Tribunal's decision was based on a detailed analysis of the relevant tariff descriptions, notifications, and the specific criteria for exclusion mentioned therein. The Tribunal's interpretation emphasized the necessity of fulfilling the prescribed conditions for exemption eligibility, particularly regarding the compression of sheets in the case of impregnated filter paper.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates