TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (10) TMI 112
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(the Schedule is referred to hereinafter as the 'CET', and the Central Excises & Salt Act as the 'Act' for brevity's sake), was provisionally approved by the Assistant Collector on 27-4-1982. By order dated 23-8-1982, the Assistant Collector finally classified the goods under Item 15A(1), CET. However, the respondents continued to clear the goods on payment of duty under Item 68 till 10-9-1982. Thereupon, the Superintendent of the concerned Range issued a show cause notice for a sum of Rs. 3,79,486.77 being the differential amount of duty for the clearances effected from 1-3-1982 to 10-9-1982. In due course, the Assistant Collector, by order dated 10-5-1984, confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1500 on the respondents. The matt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns having a distinct name and use, different from those of silicone oil. As such there is "manufacture" within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Act. It is further contended that the Collector (Appeals) erred in holding that for a substance to fall under Item 15A(1), CET, it should have resinous character or plasticity. All the materials enumerated in the entry are not resins or plastics (example, Linoxyn, Alginic Acid etc.). 4. Shri Sunder Rajan submitted that the issue of classification has been settled in favour of the Revenue by the Tribunal in its decision in the case of Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Hico Products Co. Ltd. - 1988 (34) E.L.T. 643. He prayed that in the light of this decision the impugned order be set aside and the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... it lays down, contrary to the respondents' contention, that a product specifically included in Item 15A, CET, by name, or otherwise meriting classification thereunder, would not go out of the Item for the mere reason that it does not have resinous or plastic properties. 9. The respondent's contentions is that the process of emulsifying silicone oil would not amount to "manufacture" for the purpose of Section 2(f) of the Act. It is only a physical mixing. No chemical synthesis takes place. The process does not bring into being a new product. Without prejudice to this contention, it is urged that the resultant silicone oil emulsion is classifiable under Item 68 and not 15A(1), CET. On a proper interpretation of Explanations II and III to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nes in any form i.e., liquid or pasty (including emulsions, dispersions and solutions) but not at the stage of change from one form to another, in our opinion, appears to have substance. Item 15A(1), CET, specifically lists silicones as one of the examples of condensation, polycondensation and polyaddition products. Explanation II further clarifies that in this sub-item "condensation, polycondensation, polyaddition, polymerisation and co-polymerisation products" are to be taken to apply only to goods of a kind produced by chemical synthesis answering to one of the three descriptions given in the Explanation. One of the descriptions is silicones. By virtue of Explanation III, sub-item (1) is to be taken to apply to materials in the specified....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... been, collected, regardless of the form in which the resin is cleared. To charge duty on a duty-paid resin is not what the law envisages. It has been further held that the entry does not refer to change of a duty-paid resin from one form to another but to the form in which it is excised. Thus a resin may be solid or liquid or pasty or in any other form but whatever be the form, it must be charged to duty under the Tariff. The form does not matter as far as the question of chargeability to duty (when it has not paid the duty) is concerned. But this is not the same thing as saying that duty-paid resin must pay duty afresh if its form is changed from the form in which it suffered duty. 12. The above considerations would have applied provid....