Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1995 (2) TMI 66

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ght of the fiber drum, the predominant weight is of the paper or paperboard. The same is the position in respect of value of the said fibre drum, the predominant value being of the paper or paperboard. Commercially, it is known as a paper product. 3. The dispute is as to whether the fibre drum should be classified under Item No. 17(4) as claimed by the appellant or under the residuary Item No. 68, which is the stand of the Revenue. There is no dispute that prior to the Finance Act, 1982, it was classified under the residuary Item No. 68. But thereafter the appellant sought classification of the said fibre drum under Item No. 17(4) and exemption under Notification No. 66 of 1982. By an order dated 24-3-1982, the Assistant Collector of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Central Excise (Appeals). The said appeal was allowed on the finding that fibre drum was classifiable under Item No. 17(4). The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) referred to the composition of the fibre drum and the aforesaid Trade Notice in support of his finding. 4. The Revenue preferred an appeal before the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'). The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the fibre drum manufactured by the appellant was classifiable under Item No. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff and not under Item No. 17(4). On that finding the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) was set aside. 5. On behalf of the appellant, it was urged that there was no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing container, a small piece of plywood or a steel ring is introduced, whether such packing containers shall be out of the purview of Item No. 17(4)? The Tribunal has referred to the details of the fibre drum by saying that the cylindrical portion of the fibre drum is made of paper and its bottom and top are of plywood, reinforced with mild steel ring and clamp. The Tribunal has also mentioned in the impugned order that according to the appellant, in terms of the percentage content, paper constitutes 51.18% of the finished product, the plywood content is about 23.57% and rings and clamps about 191/2%.Even before this Court, there was no dispute, that the percentage of the paper content is 51.18% only and the remaining 48.82% consists of ply....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ttom, the fibre drum is to be treated as a fibre board drum, according to the Glossary of Terms relating to Paper and Flexible Packaging issued by the Indian Standards Institution. Whatever may be the classification by the Customs Co-operation Nomenclature (CCCN - Brussels), but Tariff Item No. 17, including 17(4) clearly specify that products covered by said Item No. 17 must be the product of paper, paperboard and all sorts. 8. On behalf of the Revenue, reliance was placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of Geep Flashlight Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, 1985 (22), E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) where this Court had to consider Tariff Item No. 15A(2) which read as under : "Articles made of plastics, all sorts, including tubes, rods, sh....