MCLLOYDS & COMPANY Vs. CC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are directed against OIA No. OIO No. 25/JT.COMMR/2003 dtd. 31.12.2003. As the issue involve in these two appeals are arising out of the impugned order they are being disposed of by a common order.

(2.) THE relevant facts that arise for considerations are:

(3.) LD . Counsel would submit that the First Appellate Authority has while coming to the conclusion of classification of the goods imported, confirmation of the demand as also imposition of interest and penalties has erred. He would also submit that the main appellant M/s. Mclloyds and Company had imported Plastic Scrap of Carpet for conversion into plastic granules and the same was seized by the Customs authorities as being classifiable under Carpets under Chapter Heading No. 5702.32 and not under Chapter No. 3915.00 as classified by the appellant. It is his submission that the First Appellate Authority has accepted the fact as to the exporter having stated in a certificate that the material to be shipped to the main appellant is processed industrial material, but has wrongly come to the conclusion of classification of the product under Chapter 57 of Central Excise Tariff Act going only by the findings of the Dy. Chief Chemist. He would submit that Dy. Chief Chemist has to give only findings and could not have classified the products, which is the case. It is his submission that the appellant had imported the goods for the purpose of converting them into plastic granules and re -export to the person. He would draw our attention to the certificate issued by such exporter. It is his further submission that the appellant being a 100% EOU, no duty liability arises and the seized goods are still lying with the appellant despite their being communication from the appellant to take back such goods. He would rely upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Customs vs. East West Exporter : 1991(52) ELT. 66 (Tri.) for the proposition a chemical examiner has to give only his findings and not enter into dialogue expressing the opinion of classification of goods. He also relied upon the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Finolex Cables Ltd. vs. CCE : 1996(86) ELT. 418 (Tri.) scrap of PVC compound is classifiable under Chapter Heading No. 3915.00 of the Central Excise Act 1985 waste bearing and scrap of plastics, that the products imported by the appellant are of the nature of plastic is cleared from the Dy. Chief Chemist's report which indicates that the said product is made of polyamide Yarn.