9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 948X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals), Chennai upholding the demand confirmed in the impugned Orders-in- Original No. 1&2/2013 dated 31.01.2013 while setting aside the penalty imposed. 1.3 As the same issue is involved in all the three appeals, the same are being takenup together for common disposal. 2. Facts briefly stated are that, the Appellant, had imported "Thermal Paper' in jumbo rolls classifying them under Tariff Head 48119099 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CETA)and subsequent to import, printed the logo, name and address/ advertisement matter of the bank/customer and after the process of slitting, cutting to size and packaging, effected clearances of "ATM Rolls" by classifying them under CETH 49019900 of CETA. Since the Appellant was under the notion that Printed Thermal Paper were exempted goods, out of own volition, debited an amount equal to 5% of the value of the printed thermal rolls in terms of sub-rule 3(i) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR). However, the department alleged that the product was not printed paper as it was merely a thermal paper bearing customer details and sought to re-classify the product under Tariff Item 4811 9099 of CETA attracting 10% duty with applicable c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writing" In the explanatory notes the following instructions were issued: "A chapter note in chapter 48 is being inserted to provide that if paper and paper products of headings 4811, 4816 or 4820 are printed with any character, name logo, motif or format, they shall remain classified under chapter 48 as long as such products intended to be used for further printing (Clause 141 read with the Seventh schedule refers)" 3.3 The Ld. Counsel has pointed out that this Tribunal had in the Appellant's own case for earlier period vide Final Orders Nos. 40423 - 40424 of 2019 dated 07.03.2019 ordered to set aside the Orders-in-Appeal Nos. 142 & 143/2011 dated 25.08.2011 of the Commissioner (Appeals) and confirmed the duty demands with interest and which were per in curium and not binding on the parties as the same was made without considering the binding precedent of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, on a similar issue in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Gopsons Papers Ltd., [2015 (324) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.)] wherein it was held as follows: - "5. It is clear from the above that insofar as the assessee is concerned, it is undertaking the work of printing alone and is supplying to those ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ACT and Rules and hence the demands confirmed were sustainable and penalty imposable on the Appellant. She has contended that the classification and dutiability of ATM Rolls manufactured by the Appellant, in their own case, the Tribunal Chennai has decided vide Final Order Nos. 40423-20424/2019 dated 07.03.2019 against the Assessee. Hence, it was prayed for dismissal of the appeals filed by the Appellant. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and also evidences available on records. 6. The issues which arise for consideration in this appeal is whether Printed Thermal ATM Rolls are classifiable under CETH 49019900 or under CETH 48119099 and whether the demands confirmed are sustainable? 7. We find that that the Appellant is engaged in manufacturing of Manifold Business Forms with thermal paper in rolls classifying them under Chapter CETH 49019900 of CETA. As the rate of duty was Nil, the Appellant discharged 5% on the value of the printed thermal rolls as in terms of sub-rule 3(1) of Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. However, the Department issued Show Cause Notices to classify the printed thermal rolls under CETH 48119099 and proposing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The periods during which duty is sought to be levied in these appeals is for the goods cleared from January, 2010 to November, 2010 and February 2011 to 16.03.2012 which supports the view that the product under dispute would not be falling under 4811 before 17.03.2012. 10. We find that Chapter 49 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, details out the various products of the printing industry, whereas Chapter 48 is about paper and paper board, articles of paper pulp of paper or of paper board. No doubt both the chapters refer to the Articles of paper but Chapter 48 is of General nature, whereas Chapter 49 is specific about printed papers, including products of the printing industry. This opinion finds support from Chapter Note 4 (c) of Chapter 49 which states that the heading 4901 covers printed part of paper book or booklets in the form of assembled or separate sheets or signatures constituting the whole or a part of the complete work. Therefore, there appears to be a clear demarcation as to the intention of the legislature for formulation of these two chapters. Chapter 49 encompasses products of the printing industry, which produces its products by means of printing on paper, wherea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... examine a similar issue and classified ATM Rolls, Printed lottery ticket rolls and printed bus ticket rolls as products of the printing industry. The case also took into consideration the Amendment made to the Finance Act, 2012 by the insertion of note 14 under Chapter 48 and held that the same cannot have retrospective operation. The Tribunal has held as follows: - "5.1 From the HSN explanatory notes, it is seen that heading 4823 excludes products like lottery tickets, scratch cards, raffle tickets and tombolo tickets. Similarly, HSN explanatory notes to heading 4901 clearly shows that "certain printed articles may be intended for completion in manuscript or typescript at the time of use but remain in this heading provided they are essentially printed matter. Thus, printed forms, travel tickets, circular letters, identity documents and cards printed with messages, notices, etc. requiring only the insertion of particulars, e.g. dates and names are classified in this heading. The said notes further say that tickets for admission to places of entertainment, tickets for travel by public or private transport or other similar tickets are also included in Chapter 49. From the explanat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Kayen Print Process (P) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of C. Ex., Bangalore, the Tribunal held that printing on paper sheet and paper board would come within the category of the printing industry. Further in the decision of M/s. Universal Print Systems Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner [Excise Appeal No. 40774 of 2015], reliance was placed on the decision of the Tribunal, Chennai on Lovely Offset Printers Vs. CCE, Tirunelveli [2018 (8) G.S.T.L. 53 (Tri.-Mad.)] and Johnson and Johnson Ltd vs Collector of Central Excise, Mumbai to come to a conclusion that a bare perusal of entry 490190 are goods that came out of the place of manufacture as a printed product and covered under the phrase "and other products of the printing industry" and thereby exempted from incurring duty. 11.4 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Gopsons Papers Ltd., [2015 (324) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.)] had the occasion to examine the process of printing which was exactly similar to that of the Appellant herein and held as follows: - "5. It is clear from the above that insofar as the assessee is concerned, it is undertaking the work of printing alone and is supplying to those who place orders in this behalf. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses, Photographed, Photocopied, thermo copied or typewritten. These printed thermal paper rolls, after subjected to the printing process are converted into a printed matter usable only for the purpose relating to such printing and could no longer be used as plain paper rolls. 13. In the present case, in addition to the black bar code, details of transactions, the sheet also contains instructions on keeping the ATM premises clean, instructions on use of ATM cards safely etc. This further strengthens the point that the product is not merely of incidental use but it is of primary use. The thermal paper cut rolls, printing of paper with logos / marks of customers are not merely incidental but essential to primary use, i.e. providing information of bank statements and receipts. The pre-printed matter and the matter to be printed by ATM are inter connected and constituted a single matter. Further, the existence of blank portions in printed forms do not take them out of "other printed products and articles" which was also affirmed in Gopsons Papers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida [2006 (202) E.L.T 313] cited supra. The thermal paper roll pre-printed with logo and oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the bank, logo, etc., but that is merely incidental to the final use of the product, which is, spewing out in printed form the details of the transaction entered into by the bank customer. Printing on such ATM rolls is thus only a pre-printing for identification of the bank ATM concerned and is evidently incidental to their primary use. 8. We find that the decision in the case of M/s. ITC Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras - 1998 (97) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.) relied upon by the Ld. AR is fully applicable to the facts of this case. In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that paper/paper-board articles for packaging of cigarettes, printed - the primary use of such articles being in connection with packaging of cigarettes and printing thereon being merely incidental to their primary use, are correctly classifiable under Chapter 48. The relevant portion of the above judgment is reproduced below : "We have heard Learned Counsel for the appellant- assessee and the Learned Additional Solicitor General. We are satisfied that the conclusion reached by the Tribunal and its reasons for that conclusion are correct. The conclusion of the Tribunal is stated thus : In vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inted cartons could not be considered as products of printing industry. The ratio of the said decision cannot be applied to the facts of the present case which involve determination of classification of the printed products which could fall either under Chapter 48 or 49 depending upon the nature and scope of printing on the products. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in ITC Ltd. cited supra considered appeal against the CEGAT's Final Order Nos. 251 to 256/95-C dated 31.08.1995. On perusal of the said order of the Tribunal, it is noticed that the same dealt with classification of items like printed racks unfolded, printed top lid flats unfolded, printed hanged lid, printed shells/hulls, and slider which are parts/components of packets meant for packing of cigarettes. The Tribunal held that they could not be treated as products of printing industry on the ground "the capacity to contain is essential characteristic of a carton and not the printing work on it which is merely incidental". Tribunal heavily relied on the ratio of the decision in the case of Rolla Trainers Ltd. cited supra. The said decision of the Tribunal stands upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. As the decision clearly relat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
