Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Asmaco Industries Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Mumbai on 3 December, 2001
JUDGMENT Gowri Shankar, Member (T)
1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 2,17,989/- and penalty of equivalent amount.
2. Applicant is absent and unrepresented despite notice. We have read the stay application and heard the departmental representative. Virtually the sole basis for demanding duty is that, by virtue of note 7 to Chapter 48 of the Explanatory Notes to the harmonized System of Nomenclature, crape paper of a certain width is classifiable under heading 48.23 of the tariff and paper of another under that heading. Applying the notes, it has been concluded that the slitting of crape paper amounts to manufacture. However this note is not present in the tariff. On the other hand, note 10(A) to the Chapter provides that slitting of thermal paper does not amount to manufacture. This, prima facie , gives rise to the conclusion that slitting of any other paper does not amount to manufacture.
3. Accordingly we waive deposit of the duty demanded and penalty imposed and stay their recovery.