9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (4) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under 3907.50. The former is adjudged by Revenue while the latter is claimed by appellants. 2.Heard Ms. Mythili, ld. Advocate for appellants and Shri S. Kannan, ld. DR. 3.Ld. Advocate submitted as follows :- (i) They submitted a classification list claiming classification under 3907.50 from 31-3-1988 which was approved by department. A similar classification was also approved in 1989 and goods were cleared accordingly. (ii) Enquiries by department from time to time were replied. (iii) Composition of final product was known to department as Inputs were declared under Modvat scheme. (iv) Note 3 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p; 1989 (40) E.L.T. 276 (Tribunal) 1995 (76) E.L.T. 497 (Tribunal) 1988 (35) E.L.T. 605 (S.C.) 1992 (62) E.L.T. 241 (MP) etc. There was no wilful intent but merely an interpretation of tariff. (ix) Since no clandestine removal is involved, nor any procedure was violated, no penalty is imposable. The penalty levied was also harsh as duty was paid even prior to issue of show cause notice and cites ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication of Alkyd Resins under 3907.50, with reference to appellants consolidated classification list submitted vide latter CON CL/1988, dated 3-3-1988 (page 45 of paper book). Similarly, vide letter C. No. IV/16/SR/44/89 VC, dated 31-5-1989 (page 47 of paper book) the same AC has again approved their classification list submitted vide letter No. CON CL/1989, dated 3-3-1989 including Alkyd Resins at Sr. No. 3 under 3907.50 at NIL duty rate. As per records before us, these classification decisions were not sought to be changed by department till 1993, as neither appellants filed fresh classification lists nor the approval of classification lists noted above were reviewed by Commissioner under Section 35E etc. Merely because the AC has not ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4-9-1993 informing a voluntary payment of duty on this product for the period June 1988 to Feb., 1993. What was the necessity to disturb settled classification; just because an investigation was continuing, let alone to voluntarily pay the duty for the entire period? There is no answer to this either in the grounds of appeal or in Ld. Advocate's submissions. Since the department's investigation were still going on (not completed) it is only logical to conclude that this revised classification was not on their directions. Also, there is no evidence on record to this effect. Thus, it is clear, that when the subject show cause notice was issued a few months later, the ruling classification list was of 1993 as noted above, and the ruling class ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll grades were marketed as insulating varnish, then their classification as Alkyd Resins was obviously incorrect. When we also find that Shri Basha had admitted that Resins of other genre than Alkyd e.g. Phenolic or melamine were also added as is evident from the brew log sheets, then the end product becomes a mixture of various resins and not pure Alkyd Resin. In that situation, the specific entry in the tariff for insulating varnish would certainly prevail over Note 3 to Chapter 32 in cases where the solvent was more than 50%. Where it was less than 50%, the appellants case is still worse on merits. (vi) In view of the aforesaid findings on merits, it clearly comes out that the appellants suppressed the fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
