ORDER
S.S. Kang, Vice-President
1. The Common issue is involved on these appeals, therefore, are being taken up together.
2. Heard both sides.
3. The appellants made import of Fibre Glass Roving and claimed the benefit of Customs Notification No. 23/98, dated 2nd June, 1998 which provides concessional rate of duty of fibre glass roving for the use of manufacture of telecommunication Grade FRP Rods (Fibre Reinforced Plastic Rods). The show cause notices were issued to the appellants demanding duty in respect of Roving on the ground that the same is not used in the manufacture of Telecommunication Grade FRP Rods.
4. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed the penalties.
5. The contention of the appellants is that the Fibre Glass Roving imported by them is used in the manufacture of Telecommunication overhead cables and all the goods manufactured out of the imported goods are supplied the telecommunication department. As per the specification given by the telecommunication department in respect of self supporting PVC Drop Wire is that the same should be with fibre glass grade and roving as strength member and the fibre grade roving strength member shall be in single roving and with a minimum of 2400 TEX and shall confirm to BS 3691. The contention is that as per norms of BS 3691 E-Glass fibre roving are for reinforcement of polyester and epoxy resin systems. The appellants are using the imported fibre glass roving to make solid rigid fibre glass and are used in the manufacture of optical fibre cable as strength member. The appellants are manufacturing the same directly extruded the raw fibre glass roving along with to copper conductors to make a drop wire. The appellants also produced the samples of the drop wire manufactured by them.
6. The contention of the Revenue is that as per the opinion given by the department of telecommunication, no processing has been done on the raw fibreglass roving. Therefore, this cannot be turned as FRP. Therefore, the appellants wrongly availed the benefit of notification in respect of Glass roving.
7. We find that Revenue is relying upon the opinion given by the Director (Telecommunication Engineering Centre, New Delhi). As per the opinion the fibre glass roving imported by the appellants processed with the particular grade of rasin to make solid rigid fibre rods. These rods are used in the manufacture of optical fibre cable. The metal fibre optical fibre cable does not have any copper conductor. It is also mentioned that appellants manufacturing by directly extruded the raw fibre glass roving along with two copper conductors to make drop wire and the raw fibre glass roving has been used to meet the strength of requirement of drop wire. We further find that as per the specification of the telecommunication department for self supporting PVC drop wire are that it should be with fibre glass roving as strength member and the strength member shall be of single roving and shall confirm to British Standard specification BS 3691. We find this specification provides E-Glass fibre roving for the reinforcement of polyester and epoxy resin systems as the appellants are using the imported roving for the manufacture of telecommunication cables. In view of the above discussion, we find that the appellants are entitled for the benefit of notification. The impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed.