1997(04)LCX0023

IN THE CEGAT, COURT NO. III, NEW DELHI

S/Shri G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J) and Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD

Versus

JAI LAMINATES LTD.

Final Order No.219/97-C, dated 10-4-1997 in Appeal No.E/2176/89-C

Cases Quoted

Collector v. Waldekar Laminates (P) Ltd. — 1990(02)LCX0096 Eq 1990 (047) ELT 0610 (Tribunal) — Cited                  [Para 3]

Collector v. Bakelite Hylam Ltd. — 1997(03)LCX0041 Eq 1997 (091) ELT 0013 (S.C.) — Relied on                                        [Para 5]

Advocated By : Shri D.S. Negi, SDR, for the Appellant.

  None, for the Respondent.

[Order per : G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J)]. - This is an appeal filed by the department against the impugned order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.

2. The short point to be considered in the instant case is whether decorative laminated sheets manufactured by the respondents is classifiable under Chapter 39 as per the department or under Chapter 48 as claimed by the assessee. The Collector (Appeals) decided the issue in favour of the party holding that this item is classifiable under Chapter 48.

3. When the matter was called, none appeared on behalf of the respondents. However, they have requested to decide the case on merits. In their written submissions, it was submitted by them that item in question is classifiable under sub-heading No. 4823.90 and prior to 28-2-1988 it was classifiable under 4818.90 in view of the number of decisions of the Tribunal including the case of CCE v.Waldekar Laminates (P) Ltd. reported in 1990 (047) ELT 610.

4. We have heard Shri D.S. Negi, ld. SDR for the revenue.

5. We have carefully considered the matter. We find that the very issue had come up for consideration before the Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Hyderabad v. Bakelite Hylam Ltd. reported in 1997 (091) ELT 13, wherein it was held that “Being a composite material (Paper 60% to 70%, synthetic resin 30% to 40%), Rule 3(b) of Rules of Interpretation relevant and since essential character of the product, i.e., its rigidity or strength and its resistance to heat and moisture, is imparted by resins and not paper, the product more appropriately classifiable under Chapter 39, sub-heading 3920.31/3920.37, and not under Chapter 48, sub-heading 4818.90/4823.90 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. This conclusion also supported by Explanatory note (d) to Chapter 39 of HSN - Pre-dominance of paper in the product of no consequence since the rule of pre-dominance in Note 1 (f) to Chapter 48 applies to paper reinforced stratified plastic sheeting, or one layer of paper or paperboard coated or covered with a layer of plastics which laminated sheets (layers of resin impregnated paper pressed under a hydraulic press, applying heat and pressure) are not - .” Accordingly the Tribunal order has been reversed. In view of the finding of the Supreme Court, following the ratio, we accept the contention of the Revenue and accordingly item in question is classifiable under Chapter 39 and not under Chapter 48. Accordingly we set aside the impugned order and in the result appeal filed by the department is hereby allowed.

Equivalent 1997 (93) ELT 368 (Tribunal)