Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. The show cause notice also mentions that the matter was referred to the Director, Central Leather Research Institute, Chennai for clarification and in response, by letter dated 20.02.2014, expert opinion was provided by Dr. C. Muralidharan, Chief Scientist & Head, Tannery, CLRI, Chennai as follows :-

4 CUS/52590 OF 2019 "To Directorate of Revenue and Intelligence Lucknow.

Sir, Subject : Technical opinion on Melamine - reg. Please find below the technical opinion on melamine.

8. The expert opinion of the CLRI was that Melamine cannot be used as Syntan as such, but can be used as Syntan after treating with formaldehyde and making a condensate called Melamine formaldehyde. It was the contention of the appellant 2011 (269) E.L.T. 307 (S.C.) 6 CUS/52590 OF 2019 before the original authority/appellate authority and it is before us that even if it can be used after making it condensate with formaldehyde it will be still be eligible for exemption under licence in the light of the judgment in G.C. Jain.

9. Another contention of the appellant is that the expert opinion of CLRI is not correct as Melamine can now be used directly for tanning and it is not necessary to make a condensate with formaldehyde first. Therefore, the appellant sought cross- examination of the Chief Scientist, CLRI who gave the expert opinion. The adjudicating authority sent letters to him for cross- examination but the expert had not appeared. Therefore, the basis of the expert opinion that Melamine cannot be used as a Syntan could not be examined. Nevertheless, the original authority went by the expert opinion of CLRI and confirmed the demand. The appellant submitted technical literature to support its assertion that Melamine can be used as Syntan for tanning which are as follows:-

27. Learned Authorized Representative has placed reliance on the order of the Tribunal in the case of Balaji Action Buildwell. We find that before the Tribunal in that case was only the expert opinion of CLRI, Chennai which stated as follows "Melamine cannot be used, as such, in leather processing as Syntan". It does not appear from the order that any of the technical literature contrary to this opinion of CLRI were produced in that case by appellants before the Tribunal. It is not recorded that Melamine can be used directly, as such, on leather as a Syntan as has been the assertion of the appellant in this case from the very beginning itself.