2007 (1) TMI 38

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he ratio of the Tribunal ruling rendered in the case of ITC Ltd. v. CCE, Chennai- 2004 (166) E.L.T. 426 (Tri. - Chennai). The finding recorded in Paras 6 to 8 reproduced herein below. 6. I have examined the issue. The short point to be decided is whether the impugned order wherein duty demand is raised on the printing charges collected by the Appellant during the material period, is sustainable. 7. At the outset. I wish to record that the demand, which has been confirmed or. clearances spread over almost a decade, should have been processed by putting the appellant on notice. The impugned order has been passed in complete violation of the principles of natural justice as also the provisions of Section 11A(1) read with Section 11A(3)(i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ivision] to the Printers for a fee contracted with the Appellant, which fee has been be included in the conversion charges assessed. The lower authority simply viewed the receipt of Printing Charges in the annual statements in isolation and did not examine the contra entries pertaining to payments made to the Printers by the Appellant's liaison office at Bangalore. The financial stake connected to the Appellant's clearances is at the most limited to the liaison fee charged from the principal, which anyway is included in the conversion charges assessed. Finally, the question of considering the activity of printing as a process of manufacture has been settled by Hon. Tribunal in the case of ITC LTD. v. Commissioner of Central Ex., Chennai [20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of CCE v. Reliance Printers (supra), we hold that the classification of the printed paper board in any event if it is held to be goods would fall under Chapter Heading No.4901.90. The judgment cited by learned SDR in the case of Headway Lithographic Co. v. CCE, Kolkata-I (supra) pertains to wrapper for bin which is a different product and the classification therein is different. 8. In view of findings arrived at by us that the process of printing on the coated paper board does not amount to a process of manufacture and that the show cause notice also does no allege that such a process amounts to manufacture, we have to uphold the assessee's contention in this regard by allowing the appeal. The alternative argument for its classificatio....