Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2004 (7) TMI 138

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as been held to be a manufacturer. Second appellant is the Director of the first appellant and a penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs has been imposed on him. The period of duty demand is 1996-97 to 1999-2000 and the duty demand has been confirmed by taking resort to the extended period provided under proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. 3. The duty demand is in respect of stickers, dispensers, leather tags, banners and illuminating sign boards produced by the appellants during the course of their work as an advertisement material producer. 4. With regard to the stickers the submission of the appellants is that the only activity carried out by them is printing. Printing is done by way of offset printing or screen-printing on various bas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ractive and striking display to the products sought to be advertised. It is the appellant's contention that the case of the dispenser is more in the nature of a framed picture or photograph and thus, would merit classification as a printed product. On the contrary, Revenue submits that the item's essential character is as a display platform. It is being contended that for this reason the item cannot be treated as having been brought into existences by printing. It is also being pointed out that even in the absence of printing, the product would be a display arrangement. 6. With regard to the banners, the contention of the appellant is that only those banners, flags etc. which are manufactured in the textile industry by the process of text .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er this heading is in regard to charts etc. printed and supplied to UNICEF etc. In respect of these items, the appellant has submitted that such supplies are eligible for exemption as UN supplies. 8. We have perused the records and considered the submissions made by both sides. The stickers in question assume their identity as stickers only upon printing. The appellant procures various materials and produces stickers by printing on them. In these facts, it is clear that the stickers in question satisfy the criterion laid down by the Apex Court in Metagraphs Pvt. Ltd. case. Just as the label covered by that decision "was brought into existence" by the printing industry stickers in the present case are brought into existence by printing. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s, it is seen that HSN Explanatory Notes specifically mentions banners as falling under 6307. Thus, there is a specific entry for banners. The Notes also refer to flags, pennants, banners for ........... "other purposes". Therefore, Revenue is right in classifying them under 6307 90. 11. The Explanatory Notes to Heading 9405 makes it clear that the heading excludes signs, name plates and the like, not illuminated or illuminated by a light source not permanently fixed. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the items made by the appellant do not contain a permanently fixed light source. It has only a provision for fixing electric bulb and the power source is the power supply at the place where the signboard is installed. Heading 94 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t it was under a bona fide impression that no duty was payable on these products. Therefore, we reject this claim. 14. As already pointed out, correct duty demand has to be worked out in the present case in accordance with the classification approved by us. That too after considering the various claims of the appellant towards the exemption and Modvat credit. The quantum of penalty also depends upon the duty amount. Accordingly, the appeal No. E/541/2003-NB-A filed by M/s. Studio Printers is disposed of by way of remand for a fresh adjudication. 15. Coming to the appeal No. E/540/2003-NB-A filed by Mr. Jayanto Ghosh, we find that penalty has been imposed on him under Rule 209A merely for the reason that he is a Director of the Company a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates