TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4-2008 - Ashok Bhan and Dalveer Bhandari, JJ. T.L.V. Iyer, Senior Advocate, [Gopal Jain, Kaushik Mishra, Ms. Bindu K. Nair, Ms. Sarika Singh, Ms. Ruby Singh Ahuja, K.R. Sasiprabhu, Krishan Venugopal, K. Varghese, Sidhartha, Naresh Kumar, G. Prakash, Ms. Beena Prakash, Varun Sarin (for Ramesh Babu M.R.)], Advocates with him for the appearing parties. [Judgment per : Ashok Bhan, J.].- This order shall dispose of Civil Appeal Nos. 6469-6470 of 2002, 7169 of 2004 and 1203 of 2008. Civil Appeal Nos. 6469-6470 of 2002 1203 of 2008 2. The issue which arises for consideration in these appeals is, whether the satilon brand cookware sold by the appellants is an "aluminium household utensil made of aluminum" and "aluminium ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant filed Tax Revision case before the Kerala High Court, which has been disposed of by the impugned order. The High Court by a short order while agreeing with the findings recorded by the Tribunal, dismissed the revision and held that the products manufactured by the appellants were classifiable under the heading "similar home appliances" under Entry 104 of the Act. It was further held that the amendment to Entry 104 in the year 1999 by which the word "non-stick cookware" was added was only clarificatory in nature. The case of the appellant was that prior to the said amendment of 1.4.1999 the appellant's product would clearly fall under Entry 5 and not under Entry 104. 5. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I) (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi, 2005 (1) SCC 271 (iii) Commissioner of Central Excise, Cochin v. Apollo Tyres Ltd., 2005 (11) SCC 444 8. All these judgments are distinguishable on facts and would have no applicability to the facts of the present case. We have decided the point in issue on its own facts. Under the circumstances, we reject the plea of the appellants without adverting to the facts of the said cases. 9. For the reasons stated above, the appeals are dismissed. Civil Appeal No. 7169 of 2004 10. In this case the product is slightly different in the sense that the articles are coated with tuflon instead of satilon. Coating of tuflon also makes the article non-stick. Before the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
