Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

1996 (12) TMI 251

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing under Heading 4805.00. Later samples of such wrapping paper were got examined. In pursuance of the query raised by the Chemical Examiner, the Sales Manager of the appellants stated that the wrapping paper was made from Pulp made by chemical sulphate process. The Department was of the prima facie opinion that where the pulp was made by sulphate processing, it would merit classification under sub-heading 4804.29. The duty short levy on this count was calculated at Rs. 3,48,983.96. After issue of a show cause notice and after hearing the assessee, the Additional Collector dropped the demand. The Revenue have come up in appeal against this order. 2. Before us the case for Revenue was argued by Shri J.M. Sharma, JDR. The respondents we....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ble. He stated that with definition technology the view that wrapping paper made by sulphate paper alone was wrong. In this respect he relied upon the extract from James P. Casey's 'Pulp and Paper Chemistry and Chemical Technology' Third Edition, Volume-I Page 292. He stated that their product was not known as Kraft paper in the market. He relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Purewal Associates Ltd. v. CCE and Sundram Fasteners Ltd. v. CCE, Madras, reported in 1996 (87) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) = 1996 (67) ECR 225 (S.C.) in support of his plea that common parlance was the material factor in determining the classification of a product. He also cited the following judgments in support of his claim : 1.   &nbsp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the term "Kraft paper and paper board". The title of Heading 4804 was "uncoated kraft paper and paper board.......". Since the contested goods were not kraft liner or board, and since the pulp was not made from bagasse, the proper classification was 4804.29. 9. The plea of the learned Advocate that wrapping paper was of inferior quality and that kraft paper was not used for wrapping being of supreme quality is not born out of perusal of the Text Books. McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms defines Kraft paper as "A strong paper or cardboard made from sulphate-process wood pulp; unbleached varieties are used for wrapping paper and shipping cartons." Gessner G. Hawley's Dictionary defined it as that "A strong and rel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... paper is under Heading 4804.29 only. 11. We now consider the submissions of Shri Kapoor, Advocate as to the demand being hit by limitation. He stated that the department was aware of the fact that sulphate process was being used by them for a long time. It was cleared by Shri Kapoor, Advocate that if the department wanted to know whether the wrapping paper was made by the sulphate paper, they could have asked for clarification before approving classification list. 12. We have carefully examined the 3 classification lists indicating that the assessees were manufacturing various varities of paper falling under such Headings 4802, 4804 and 4805. They had declared Kraft paper under Heading 4804 and had declared wrapping paper under....