MODERN PROCESS PRINTERS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant against Order -in -Appeal C. Cus. No. 315/2002 dated 25.7.2002 by which the Ld. Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) has upheld the order of the lower adjudicating authority. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Group 7) vide his Order -in -Original No. 1097/02 dated 9.7.2002 had observed that the issue involved is whether TRA can be issued for the goods "Printing Paper of GSM 135 where the DFRC license produced allows only printing paper of GSM 59.3 as endorsed by the customs based on test report and the export product falls under the SION A 1579. He therefore held that the DFRC licence was verified and was endorsed by the customs that as per the test report of the export product the item allowed to import is printing paper of GSM 59.3.

(2.) COUNSEL Shri M. Rajendran appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued that as per the General Note 10 of "Chemical and Allied Products" in the item under SION A 1579 and the DFRC licence the goods should be allowed within the range of GSM 50 to GSM 150 and the TRA which was required for printing paper of GSM 135 (being within the range of GSM 50 to GSM 150) should have been issued by the department. Counsel further submitted that they are manufacturers of printing paper between 50 GSM and 150 GSM and even of a higher grammage than 150 GSM. This printing paper of 135 GSM would be used by them in the manufacture of printing paper and the resultant paper would be ultimately exported. Therefore, the action of the customs authority to refuse the issue of TRA for the import of 135 GSM printing paper which would be used in the resultant goods meant for export is illegal and the impugned order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) requires to be set aside.

(3.) DR Shri A. Jayachandran invited our attention to the Notification No. 48/2000 Cus dated 25.4,2000 and also to the test report where the resultant product was found to be 59.3 GSM. He therefore submitted that the material which are used in the manufacture of resultant product when imported into India is only entitled for the benefit of Notification No. 48/2000 -Cus. dated 25.4.2000. Therefore their request for issue of TRA has been rightly rejected by both the lower authorities. He therefore requested that the appeal filed by the appellant may be rejected.