- (1.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The assessee is engaged in the manufacture of Synthetic Rubber Aprons and Synthetic Rubber Cots. According to the assessee, the manufactured goods are classifiable under Chapter Heading 4009.99 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The classification list in this regard was approved by the Assistant Commissioner. Against the approval granted by the Assistant Commissioner, the Revenue preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) in which it was contended that the goods were actually classifiable under Chapter Heading 4016.99. The appeal filed by the Revenue before the Commissioner (Appeals) was rejected and thereafter an appeal was filed by the Revenue before the Central Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai (for short 'the Tribunal').
(2.) In the meanwhile, the Revenue issued seven show cause notices to the assessee seeking to classify the goods under Chapter Heading 4016.99 and demanding consequential duty. Our concern is with these seven show cause notices. The Tribunal at Mumbai heard the assessee as well as the Revenue. Instead of deciding whether the goods fall under Chapter Heading 4009.99 as contended by the assessee and approved by the Assistant Commissioner or Chapter Heading 4016.99 as sought to be contended before the Commissioner (Appeals), the view taken was that the goods fall under Chapter Heading 8448.00. This conclusion was arrived at on the basis of an order passed by the Tribunal at Bangalore in the case of the assessee itself.
(3.) Feeling aggrieved by the decision rendered by the Tribunal at Mumbai, the assessee is before us in appeal. The only contention urged by the appellant is that since the show cause notices were issued for classification of the goods under Chapter Heading 4016.99, the Tribunal could not have directed the classification of the goods under Chapter Heading 8448.00. This was not even the case of the Revenue and it came up for the first time before the Tribunal.;