TMI Blog1997 (9) TMI 266X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... put the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various products. They submitted two classification lists. Classification List No. 31/MRG-II/85-86/C was effective from 6-11-1985. The second Classification List No. 41/MRG-II/85-86/C was effective from 1-1-1986. The appellants claimed classification of the product under Tariff Item 68 of the then CET. The Departme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e wood based compreg board. In support of his contention he cited and relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Permali Wallace Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Indore, 1996 (88) E.L.T. 306 (S.C.). The ld. SDR submits that the case is fully covered in favour of the Revenue and prays that the appeal may be rejected. 4. Considered the submissions made by the ld. SDR. Perused th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amendment of entry 16B, it ought to have been classified under entry 68. 5. From the above, it is clear that with effect from 28-2-1982 wood based compreg board was classifiable under Tariff Item 16B of the then CET. Precisely, this is what the lower authorities have done. In this view of the matter we do not see any legal infirmity in the order passed by the lower authorities. In the circums ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
