https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166811 Plastic-coated paper did not qualify as paper printed with colour under Notification No. 68/76 because colour must be imparted to the paper itself, and the attachment of a coloured PVC sheet was treated as coating rather than colour printing. The absence of a quantified duty demand in the show-cause notice did not vitiate the proceedings, as the notice was considered sufficient for an assessee familiar with central excise practice. The plea of impermissible double duty also failed because the earlier duty payment related to a different tariff position, and the later levy applied after processing moved the product into a new classification. en-us Tue, 20 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Nov 2014 16:43:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166811 Plastic-coated paper did not qualify as paper printed with colour under Notification No. 68/76 because colour must be imparted to the paper itself, and the attachment of a coloured PVC sheet was treated as coating rather than colour printing. The absence of a quantified duty demand in the show-cause notice did not vitiate the proceedings, as the notice was considered sufficient for an assessee familiar with central excise practice. The plea of impermissible double duty also failed because the earlier duty payment related to a different tariff position, and the later levy applied after processing moved the product into a new classification. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166811