TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 654
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 39079190 of the schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. ii.) I also order to classify the excisable goods viz. Compound of Polyamide, under Chapter Sub Heading No. 39081090 of the schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. iii.) I confirmed and order to recover the differential Central Excise duty amounting to Rs.2,88,58,033/- (Rupees Two Crore eighty eight lakhs fifty eight thousand and thirty three, including Education Cess and Sec. & High. Ed. Cess), as detailed in annexure "A-1, A-2 and A-3" to the Show Cause Notice, from M/s. Axel Polymers Limited, S.No. 309, Village- Mokshi, Sankarda SAvli Road, Tal-Savli, Dist.-Vadodara under proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. iv.) I order to recover interest fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aterial therefore, the goods does not fall under the description i.e. polyester chips or nylon chips. The contention of the adjudicating authority is that the term 'Polyester Chips'and 'Nylon Chips'are in respect of pure material and not compounded with other material. The demand was also confirmed invoking the extended period of limitation. 02. Shri Anand Nainawati, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the exemption from payment of excise duty under the notification supra is provided in respect of Polyester Chips and Nylon Chips. It is his submission that admittedly both the products having active ingredient i.e. in Polyester Chips is 70.65% and 29.35% of glass fibres plus NV additives in respect of nylon chip....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of relevant entries of notification therefore, there is absolutely no suppression of fact on the part of the appellant accordingly, the demand for extended period is not sustainable. He placed reliance on the following judgments:- * UNION OF INDIA V/s. INTER CONTINENTAL (India)- 2008 (226) ELT 16 (S.C.) * INTER-CONTINENTAL (INDIA) V/s. UNION OF INDIA- 2003 (154) ELT 37 (Guj.) * TATA TELESERVICES LTD V/s. CC- 2006 (194) ELT 11 (S.C.) * GUJARAT POLYCRETE PRIVATE LTD. V/s. CCE, AHMEDABAD 1999 (114) ELT 843 (Tribunal) * Continental Foundation JT Venture Vs CCE Chandigarh- 2007 (216) ELT 177 (S.C) * Larson & Turbo Ltd Vs CCE, Mumbai -II 1998 (103) ELT 404 (Tribunal) * CCE, Mumbai-III Vs Narendra Kumar & Co. 2008 (232) ELT 866 (Tri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mption similarly, all the nylon chips falling under 3908 is eligible for exemption. The adjudicating authority has denied the exemption relying on the clarification given by the Chemical examiner and chemical examination report which is reproduced below:- "1. Polyester chips: The sample is in the form of white chips mainly composed of Polyester and additives, glass fibre % of Polyester = 70.65% (Approx) % of Glass Fiber+ NV additives = 29.35 The sample is other than pure Polyester chips. It is glass fiber reinforced Polyester composite chips (Polyester compounded chips). This item can't be used in textile industry. It is used in preparation of moulded articles. 2. Nylon chips: The sample is in the form of Black colour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iven of his own assumption that since the PBT and nylon chips are not pure the same cannot be considered as polyester chips and nylon chips which is very absurd observation of the learned Commissioner. It is settled law that any chemical compound is classifiable on the basis of its active ingredient only. In the present case, since both the products are admittedly pre-dominance of Polyester and Nylon, the same are classifiable under 3907 and 3908 respectively. Undisputedly, the form of the product is in chips so therefore, both the products are clearly qualified as polyester chips and nylon chips being constituent of pre-dominantly polyester and nylon respectively. The classification of the product decided by the commissioner will have no a....