Judgements

Hmg Packagings Pvt. Ltd. And … vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 26 February, 2004

Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Mumbai
Hmg Packagings Pvt. Ltd. And … vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 26 February, 2004
Bench: J Balasundaram, A M Moheb


ORDER

Moheb Ali M., Member (T)

1. These applications for waiver of predeposit of duty and penalties imposed by the Commissioner and stay recovery thereof arose out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise Raigad.

2. Briefly the facts are that the applicants arc manufacturers of excisable goods falling under Chapter heading 48 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They filed a classification list claiming exemption, on printed corrugated boxes and cartons manufacturing by them under Notification No. 59/88 dated 1.3.88 on the ground that printed boxes/cartons were made out of paper and paper board falling under Chapter sub-heading 48.04 and 4805.30. The Department’s contention is that the appellants manufacture printed corrugated boxes out of printed paper board and such printed paper board falls under Chapter Subheading 4811.90 of Central Excise Tariff Act and that the printed corrugated boxes are not entitled for exemption under Notification No. 59/88 for that reason. The basis for such contention is that the said Notification does not apply to goods manufactured out of inputs falling under Chapter 4811.90.

3. The appellants contend that they purchase Kraft paper as well as duplex paper on which printing is carried out as per the Customers’ design. When these three plies (Two plies of Kraft paper/paper board and one of printed) one put together corrugated box falling under Chapter heading 48.08 emerges Since the cartons arc made out of paper/paper board they are entitled in the benefit of Notification No.59/88.

4. Heard both sides.

5. During the course of hearing the Ld. Advocate demonstrated as to how the final product emerges and , the inputs that go into its manufacture. He contended that the inputs fall under subheading mentioned in the notification referred to above and therefore the final product made out of them is exempt from payment of duty. After examining the rival contentions we are of the opinion that the appellants made out a strong Prime force case in their favour. We therefore waive the pre deposit of duty and penalties and stay recovery thereof pending the appeals. Stay applications allowed.

(Pronounced in Court)