Consequently, the appellants companytend that their products are entitled to the benefit of duty exemption available by virtue of Notification Nos.122/75 and 234/82 as applicable at the relevant time.
It is the companytention of the appellant that by virtue of the Circulars issued by the Central Board of Excise Customs hereinafter referred to as the Board dated 23.7.1986 and clarificatory Circular issued by the Board dated 7.8.1987 the aforesaid products of the appellant are to be classified as the products of the printing industry subject to duty under Chapter 49 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
Both the appeals arise out of the same dispute.
Consequently, the said products of the appellant are number to be classified as the products of the packaging industry companying within Chapter 39 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1988.
E/4412/95 SB WR and an order dated 16.7.1997 made by the CEGAT refusing to review clarify its earlier order dated 21.10.1997.
It is the companymon case of the parties that the view taken by the Board in the above mentioned Circulars dated 23.7.1986 and 7.8.1987 was reviewed with effect from 16.1.1989 by virtue of Circular No.6/89 of the Board dated 16.1.1989.
The appellant also submits that with effect from the said date the appellant is classifying its products in terms of Circular No.6/89 dated 16.1.1989.
The appellant in the above appeals is manufacturing a printed polyester films backed with paper b printed polyester films backed with polythene films and c printed polyester films backed with aluminium foils all of which are used either as labels, pouches or wrappers.
SANTOSH HEGDE, J. These appeals are preferred against two orders of the Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal for short the CEGAT dated 21.10.1997 made in Appeal No.
