TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ’s judgment in case of Bharat Metal Decorators - 2005 (185) ELT 397 (TRI), Sai Security Printers Ltd. 2006 (199) ELT 121 and CCE, Aurangabad v. Adhunik Plastic Inds. [1998 (1) TMI 129 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI] are absolutely applicable in the given controversy. In all the aforesaid cases the products coming into existence were held to be printing industry products. The impugned products are classifiable under chapter sub heading 4901.90 and the demand made under chapter sub heading 39 is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/406/08, E/989, 990/08, E/CO-84/08 - A/85037-85039/18 - Dated:- 11-1-2018 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) And Shri Raju, Member (Technical) Shri R.B. Pardeshi, Advocate for Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ins a distinct and different character which is known as product of printing industry. He also submits copies of cards manufactured by them. He relies upon Section Note 2 of Section VII and submits that the said section clearly excludes the article manufactured by them. He also relies upon Board Circular No.141/52/95 - CX dt. 14.08.95 to state that the printed cards manufactured by them merits classification under chapter 49. He relies upon following judgments in support of his contention : (i) HOLOSTICK INDIA LTD. - 2015 (318) ELT 529 (SC) (ii) FITRITE PACKERS - 1999 (108) ELT 680 (TRI) (iii) SRI KUMAR AGENCIES - 2000 (116) ELT 483 (TRI) (iv) BHARAT METAL DECORATORS - 2005 (185) ELT 397 (v) SAI SECURITY PRI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication and thus cannot be termed as articles of plastic. The Hon ble Apex Court judgment in case of Metagraphics Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Bombay - 1996 (88) ELT 630 (SC) and Tribunal s judgment in case of Bharat Metal Decorators - 2005 (185) ELT 397 (TRI), Sai Security Printers Ltd. 2006 (199) ELT 121 and CCE, Aurangabad v. Adhunik Plastic Inds. - 1998 (98) ELT 365 (Tri.) are absolutely applicable in the given controversy. In all the aforesaid cases the products coming into existence were held to be printing industry products. 5. As per the above settled position of law we are of the view that the impugned products are classifiable under chapter sub heading 4901.90 and the demand made under chapter sub heading 39 is not sustainabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
