NUCHEM PLASTICS LTD Vs. COLLECTOR OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal to the Tribunal against the order -in -appeal No. 129 -CE/DLH/83 dated 23.2.1983 of the Collector (Appeals) Central Excise, New Delhi, in which he has upheld the order -in -original No. 20/81 dated 1.7.81 issued by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division III, Faridabad.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that the appellants have been manufacturing urea formaldehyde moulding power (UFMP) falling under Item 15A(1) of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule. They filed a series of classification lists, namely No. 18/80 effective 27.2.80, 26/80 effective 18.6.80 and 35/80 effective 19.6.80, in respect of UFMP. In each of these classification lists they claimed the benefit of the concessional rate of duty under Notifica - tion No. 7/80, dated 27.2.1980. This notification provided for a concessional rate of duty, namely 33%, in respect of UFMP "manufactured from raw naphtha or any chemical derived therefrom, on which the appropriate amount of duty of excise has already been paid". The classification lists were duly approved by the concerned Assistant Collector. Subsequently, a show cause notice dated 15.1.81 was issued to the appellants, requiring them to show cause to the Assistant Collector why the approval to the three classification lists should not be revoked, the appropriate amount of duty on the UFMP should not be approved at 40% instead of at 33% as leviable under Notification in /80, and the differential duty should not be demanded from them under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules. After following the adjudication procedure, the Assistant Collector passed his order dated 1.7.81 containing decision as proposed In the show cause notice. An appeal to the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) having been rejected, the appellants have come before us.

(3.) ON behalf of the appellants, their Advocate, Shri K. Narasimhan, raised a number of points, on which he argued at length. It is, however, necessary to consider in detail only two of his contentions, which are as follows : -