2018 (6) TMI 1339

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he appellants were manufacturing Fabric Based Laminates, Decorative Laminates and Electrical Insulator and availing exemption under Notification No.50/2003-CE dated 10.06.2003. It was alleged that during the manufacture of said goods Phenol Formaldehyde Resin, Phenol Formaldehyde Resin (CPF) and Melamine Formaldehyde Resin get manufactured. It appeared to Revenue that the said Resins were classifiable under chapter heading No.3909 of schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and said Resins were included in negative list, since negative list included said chapter heading No.3909 at Sl.No.20 of negative list of Notification No.50/2003-CE dated 10.06.2003. Therefore said Resins did not enjoy benefit of Notification No.67/95-CE dated 16.03.1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The ld.A.R. has supported the impugned Order-in-Original. 5. Having considered the contentions from both sides and on perusal of records and on perusal of said Final Order dated 17.01.2018 in the case of Greenply Industries Ltd., we find that identical issues came up before this Tribunal in the case of M/s.Balaji Action Buildwell (supra) wherein this Tribunal has observed as under:- "14. On examining scope of CETH 3909 read with Chapter Note 6 and HSN explanation the product in dispute being not in Primary form of such nature mentioned therein (requiring curing, etc.) is not to be classified under such heading. The exclusion note made in HSN adds support to the same. The Revenue's assertion that addition of hardening agent does not ta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ect report. The appellant produced copies of different test reports done in 2011 as well as 2012 by the same Institute where pH values were indicated whereas in respect of their samples, no pH value has been indicated. They have also contested the findings in the test as they were not allowed cross-examination by the Original Authority. The denial was on the reason that the test report is a document and it is not required to be accepted only after cross-examination. The appellant's plea, that in such circumstances, the reliance placed on the test report is not legally tenable, merits consideration. We are in agreement on such plea on the reasons cited above. 17. Regarding purchase of resin reactor from Alex Engineering Works, it is seen ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s to serve as a glue. 19. As stated earlier before comparing the impugned product with the product of other manufacturers and also before applying case laws to the present facts, it is necessary that Original Authority should have examined the processes undertaken and the comparability of the good sin chemical nature. No such analysis or finding to that effect is available in the impugned order. The appellant have categorically submitted that the impugned goods are prepared for specific need and requirement of bonding of wood fibers/wood particles/coating of papers during the manufacture of final product like MDF Board, Particle Board, etc. The fact is that the preparation of impugned goods is in one stage process under controlled temper....