TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. E/58305/2013-EX [DB] - Final Order Nos-70243-70245/2018 - Dated:- 17-1-2018 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri B.L. Naresimhan Shri Atul Gupta, Advocates for Appellant Shri Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Supdt (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per : Ashok Jindal When the matter was called, a proxy counsel appeared on behalf of M/s Rama Panels Pvt. Ltd. and prayed for short adjournment. In the matter the main counsel is not available. After appreciating the facts of the case, we find that the case is identical and similar with two appeals filed by M/s Greenply Industries Ltd. and M/s Archidply Industries Ltd. Thereafter, we attached the appeal along with two appeals mentione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjudicated and the Commissioner confirmed the demand after allowing the benefit of admissible credit on the inputs and input service. Aggrieved from the same, the appellants have filed this appeal. 4. The learned Counsel for the appellants submits, as under:- 2. Learned Advocate for the appellants submits that PFR/MFR resins are classifiable under heading 3506 and are eligible for area based exemption notification. It was argued that they had obtained resins by mixing melamine/phenol, formaldehyde and other chemicals for use as adhesive in the manufacture of laminates. He referred to the exclusion note contained in HSN Explanatory Notes in Chapter 39, which clearly excludes from Chapter 39 such preparation specifically formulate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parties and considering the facts. 6. Considering the facts that the identical issues come up before this Tribunal in the case of M/s Balaji Action Buildwell (supra) wherein this Tribunal has observed as under:- 14. On examining scope of CETH 3909 read with Chapter Note 6 and HSN explanation the product in dispute being not in Primary Form of such nature mentioned therein (requiring curing, etc.) is not to be classified under such heading. The exclusion note made in HSN adds support to the same. The Revenue s assertion that addition of hardening agent does not take away the basic property of the product being a resin is not sustainable in the present dispute. Addition of NH4CL as hardening agent in the reactor/kettle before the resu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their samples, no pH value has been indicated. They have also contested the findings in the test as they were not allowed cross-examination by the Original Authority. The denial was on the reason that the test report is a document and it is not required to be accepted only after cross-examination. The appellant s plea, that in such circumstances, the reliance placed on the test report is not legally tenable, merits consideration. We are in agreement on such plea on the reasons cited above. 17. Regarding purchase of resin reactor from Alex Engineering Works, it is seen that Revenue placed reliance on purchase order which mentioned the product as MF Resin Reactor . The appellants have contended that there are various types of equipments ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present facts, it is necessary that Original Authority should have examined the processes undertaken and the comparability of the goods in chemical nature. No such analysis or finding to that effect is available in the impugned order. The appellant have categorically submitted that the impugned goods are prepared for specific need and requirement of bonding of wood fibers/wood particles/coating of papers during the manufacture of final product like MDF Board, Particle Board, etc. The fact is that the preparation of impugned goods is in one stage process under controlled temperature and pH and addition of Ammonium Gloride Formic Acid in the processes, the emerging product being transferred to glue kitchen area for final use in bonding. We f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
