2002 (11) TMI 444

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... per : C. Satapathy, Member (T)]. - Shri A. Hidayatulla, learned advocate for the appellants states that these four appeals are against a common order confirming a duty demand of Rs. 33,43,486.25 Ps. and imposing a penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. The period of demand relates to 31-3-1992 to 31-7-1993. The appellants manufacture table tops from duty paid decorative laminated sheets purchased from othe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n. The classification of the inputs cannot be changed to 4823.19 at the receiving end and the adjudicating Commissioner is in error in reclassifying the inputs as paper/paperboard and not as an article of paper/paperboard. The learned advocate cites the following case laws in support of this arguments :- 1. Tata Oil Mills v. C.C.E., Cochin - 1997 (91) E.L.T. 144 (Trib.) 2. C.C.E. v. Hindustan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rvention states that the Apex Court has decided the classification of decorative laminates under Chapter 39 and that the same should be kept in view. He has later on submitted the following case laws :- 1. C.C.E., Hyderabad v. Bakelite Hylam Ltd. - 1997 (91) E.L.T. 13 (S.C.) 2. C.C.E. v. Wood Polymers Ltd. - 1998 (97) E.L.T. 193 (S.C.) 3. We have heard both sides and perused the case records .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X