1994 (3) TMI 178

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Khaitan and Ms. Amrita Mittra, Advocates, for the Appellants. Shri B.K. Singh, SDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Member (T)]. -  Since common questions are involved, a common order is being passed. 2. Question involved in these cases is whether the printed paper board articles described as follows :- (i) Outer shells only (ii) Outer shells alongwith slides ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 4. On the analogy of reasoning in the aforesaid two judgments of the High Courts, he submits that hinge lids cut out and inner frames cannot also be made liable to duty in terms of the said tariff entry read with the said notification. 5. In order to understand and appreciate the issue and ratio of decisions before the two High Courts - on which vehement argument has been advanced b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ini Sood for the Petitioner. Mr. Madan Lokur for the Respondent. CM 7685/93 in CW 1567/83 Mr. Lokur says that the matter is covered by the decision of this Court in ITC v. Union of India. C.W. No. 2925/82, decided on 18th February, 1993 and Zupiter Printery v. Union of India C.W. 1490/82 decided on 7th March, 1991. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the aforesaid dec....