2017 (4) TMI 686

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri G.R. Singh, DR for the appellant. Rep. by Shri R.K. Philips, Advocate for the respondent. Per B. Ravichandran: The Revenue is in appeal against the order dated 13.04.2009 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Delhi-I. 2. The respondents were engaged in the manufacture of paper labels, duplex cartons, publicity materials. In July, 2006, Central Excise Officers conducted certa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ufactured and cleared viz. paper sticker, visual aid folders, etc are correctly classifiable under Chapter 49 as product of printing industry. He modified the central excise demand accordingly. He set aside the penalty imposed on the partner of the respondent firm. 3. The Revenue in the appeal contested the findings in the impugned order with reference to classification of paper stickers and no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... or paper board labels with or without printing, rather they are printed matter and primarily understood as printed labels for publicity. Examining the technical aspect of the tariff classification, we note that the impugned order examined the same in detail. In fact, it is categorically recorded that neither the show cause notice nor the original order has spelt out as to how these products are c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as printed material covered under Heading 4911. 7. On examining the sample material, the impugned order and the grounds of appeal by Revenue, we find no merit in the submission against the findings in the impugned order regarding classification to product under tariff heading 4911. We are in agreement with the findings recorded in the impugned order. 8. Regarding non-imposition of penalty on....