9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (2) TMI 406X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting and lacquering of containers, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay by his Order No. 1864/BI-318/81 and No. 1866/BI-320/81 both dated 13-1-1982 and the Assistant Collector of Central Excise Division P. Bombay by his two orders dated 6-8-1980 said that the duty paid unprinted aluminium colapsible tubes should pay duty again under the same item after they are printed. This is not a correct action. The learned Director for M/s. Impact Containers, Mr. Patel said that the unprinted metal aluminium tubes were duty-paid, and printing and lacquering had been done before the budget changes made 18-6-1980. Therefore in accordance with the judgment of the Kirloskar Brothers v. Union of India - 1978 (2) E.L.T. J 33 (Tribunal), they woul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted and lacquered containers in the same item as unprinted plain containers. That means, plain containers and printed containers became leviable from 19-6-1980 under the same heading to the same duty. The budget did not introduce a separate heading or sub-heading for printed lacquered containers, but it entered the description in the same head with unprinted plain containers. The effect, therefore, is that the printed containers will be subject to the same rate of duty under the same head as plain unprinted containers. 5. Now the aim of the amendment is clear -- that a container whether plain or printed whether lacquered or bar, would suffer the same duty and that the man who produces lacquered printed containers cannot claim immunity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n this case and the Assistant Collector and the Appellate Collector do not tell, that they would allow credit for the duty paid on the plain containers. Even when corrective notifications are in course of time issued, the shock has already been felt and it is only later clearances that may be relieved. But this is not always the case. 8. The main reason for my inability to agree with the Department's action is, however, that the duty having been paid, the item heading being the same, that same duty can never be levied again as long as the article remains assessable within the same heading/item/sub-heading. For this reason I set aside the orders of the Appellate Collector and the Assistant Collector and direct the printed containers to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
