2009 (2) TMI 188

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Naveen Mullick, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.K. Das, Member (J) (for the Bench)].- Revenue filed this appeal against order-in-appeal No. 126-CE/DLH/2004 dated 15-7-04 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) New Delhi. The issue involved in this case is as to whether the product "Flexible Dueling and Parts thereof" would be entitled to exemption under Notification No. 6/2000, dated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....from the facts on record and the Revenue appeal that the product in dispute was rightly classifiable under tariff entry 39.17 and this fact is not disputed by the Revenue Appellant also, This tariff entry, as can be seen in the Tariff Act, 1985, covers the goods namely tubes, pipes and hoses of plastics and their fittings (not parts). The product of the Respondents by whatsoever name it is called ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at product, cannot be called as pipe or hose and would merit to fall under the meaning of tube only. If so, it being lay flat tubing would certainly attract exemption of duty under said exemption notification. From the dictionary meaning also, I find that meanings of "duct" include "tube" and besides all, the product in dispute, by whatsoever name called is nothing but a sort of lay flat tube of p....