2003 (10) TMI 504 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal upholds exemption for laminated jute products under Notification No. 53/65

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision to grant exemption on laminated jute products under Notification No. 53/65 to the respondents. ... Entitlement to exemption under Notification No. 53/65 for laminated jute products - classification under Heading 5903.90 - process of lamination and its relevance to exemption - treatment of bitumen-bonded laminated products as laminated jute manufacturesEntitlement to exemption under Notification No. 53/65 for laminated jute products - process of lamination and its relevance to exemption - classification under Heading 5903.90 - Whether laminated jute products, laminated by bitumen bonding rather than a thermosetting process, are entitled to exemption under Notification No. 53/65 as amended - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal held that the notification does not prescribe or limit the benefit to laminated jute products made by any particular process; no distinction is drawn in the notification between products laminated by thermosetting processes and those laminated by bonding methods. The respondents' goods were accepted as laminated jute fabrics and classifiable under Heading 5903.90; the process of lamination by melting bitumen to bond polythene and jute does not exclude the product from the notification's exemption. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in Mahakali Plastic Weave Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Bombay to the effect that bitumen-bonded layered products composed of paper and jute are to be treated as laminated jute manufactures. The respondents' own invoices describing the goods as laminated jute fabrics were also noted. Having found no requirement in the notification to confine the exemption to a particular manufacturing process, the Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner (Appeals)'s grant of benefit.Appeal of the Revenue rejected; respondents entitled to the benefit of the notification for their laminated jute fabrics.Final Conclusion: The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner (Appeals)'s finding that the respondents' bitumen-bonded laminated jute fabrics qualify for exemption under Notification No. 53/65; the Revenue's appeal is dismissed. Issues involved:Interpretation of Notification No. 53/65 for exemption on laminated jute products.Analysis:The appeal revolved around whether the manufacturer of laminated jute products is eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 53/65. The Commissioner (Appeals) had granted the benefit to the respondents, stating that their products are indeed laminated jute fabrics falling under Heading 5903.90. The Revenue challenged this decision, arguing that the lamination process used did not meet the criteria specified in the notification. The Tribunal noted that the notification did not specify the exact manufacturing process required for the exemption. Referring to a previous case, it was established that products with bitumen-bonded layers of paper and jute should be considered as laminated jute manufactures. Additionally, the respondents had consistently referred to the goods as laminated jute fabrics in their invoices.The Tribunal, after hearing arguments from both sides, concluded that the notification did not differentiate between different manufacturing processes for laminated jute products. Citing the precedent set by the Mahakali Plastic Weave Pvt. Ltd. case, the Tribunal affirmed that products with bitumen-bonded layers should be considered for the exemption. Given these factors, the Tribunal found no fault in the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision to grant the benefit to the respondents. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed, upholding the decision in favor of the respondents.