1998 (7) TMI 249 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
MADURA COATS LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF C. EX., MADRAS
........... colour from the earlier headings of the said chapter. The said heading cannot be read in isolation from the other headings of Chapter 59 because it speaks of ldquo all other textile products and articles .... rdquo The word other rsquo mentioned in heading suggests that they have to be of the type which are mentioned in the earlier headings because the earlier headings are either articles or are textile products subjected to some process. Merely because the cotton fabric manufactured by the appellants is used in tea industry without any further process it cannot be said that it is an industrial fabric alternative uses of the fabric not having been ruled out by the lower authorities. Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case including the process of manufacture we are of the view that the correct heading most akin to the product in question would be Tariff Heading 52.05 and not 59.09. Hence, we allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.
1998 (7) TMI 248 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI Versus PRACHI GRAPHICS
Manufacture - Dilution of P.V.A. solution ......
........... 6 of Chapter 39 which states that conversion of one primary form into other form shall amount to manufacture. Collector (Appeals) while disposing of two orders of the Assistant Collector on the classification and demand of duty, upheld the contention of the assessees that the form before dilution was also solution, and the form even after dilution remains solution and hence it was not a case of conversion of one primary form into other so as to attract duty notwithstanding anything contained in Note 6 to the Chapter Heading 39. Hence this appeal. 2. emsp We find that in the appeals before us, although the Revenue has set out Note 6 to Chapter 39, there is no dispute about the Collector (Appeals) findings that the product before or after dilution is the same P.V.A. solution. In this view of this matter we see no error in the impugned order and there is no conversion from one primary form into another primary form, and hence we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeals.
1998 (7) TMI 247 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI Versus STAR PLASTIC
Exemption Notification ......
........... msp We have gone through the Exemption Notification 53/88-C.E., dated 1-3-1988. Exemption against Sl. No. 39 is a conditional exemption. In case those conditions are not fulfilled, then the goods were to be assessed to duty against Sl. No. 40 of the table to the Notification. It has been held by the Tribunal in the case of CCE, New Delhi v. Thermopack Industries 1998 (27) RLT 133 that it is the option of a manufacturer as to which Sl. No. of a Notification to avail of, for the purpose of exemption. We find that Sl. Nos. 39 and 40 are not similarly worded e.g. there is no condition attached against Sl. No. 40 of the Notification. It is the option of the assessee to pay duty and not avail full exemption in terms of Sl. No. 39, which is a conditional entry. Following the ratio of the order cited above, we hold that the benefit of exemption in terms of Sl. No. 40 of Notification 53/88 is available to the respondents and accordingly uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.
1998 (7) TMI 246 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
THERMOPLAST Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY
Modvat - Non-excisable item ......
........... it since that is the subject matter of a separate show cause notice. He also submits that credit cannot be asked to be reversed, since the appellants were paying duty on the rigid PU foam during the relevant period under the directions of the Department. Learned SDR, Shri Satnam Singh supports the impugned order contending that once the rigid PU foam has been held to be non-excisable, the question of availing credit of duty paid on the inputs does not arise. 3. emsp We have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. Since there is no dispute that a separate show cause notice has been issued on 8-8-1991 seeking reversal of the credit availed by the appellants of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of rigid PU foam which has been ultimately held to be non-excisable, this issue will have to be adjudicated in terms of that notice and no orders are required to be passed on this issue in the present proceedings. 4. emsp The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
1998 (7) TMI 245 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY Versus THERMO PLAST
Appeal by Department ......
........... hat the product in question was not to be considered as excisable goods, as held by the Tribunal in the case of Milton Plastics v. Collector of Central Excise (Final Order No. 655/90-C, dated 27-6-1990), and there being no duty on the final product, Modvat credit on inputs could not be allowed. Accordingly, the Assistant Collector filed an application in Form EA2 in July 1991 to the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) who decided the appeal holding that since the goods are not excisable and not liable to duty, the assessees could not claim Modvat credit of duty paid on inputs. 2. emsp We have heard Shri H.K. Jain, learned SDR and Shri R. Sudhinder, learned Advocate. 3. emsp We agree with the learned Counsel that since Collector (Appeals) by the impugned order had entirely allowed the prayer of the Revenue, there could exist no grievance with his order, in order to maintain an appeal before the Tribunal against his order. We, therefore, reject the appeal as not maintainable.
1998 (7) TMI 243 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
DHVANI TEREFABS (P) LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, INDORE
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ......
........... d learned SDR Shri A.K. Agarwal reiterates the finding of the adjudicating authority. He submits that the job workers who did the work of stitching and hemming stated that they received the cut towels and napkins from the applicants for stitching and hemming. He therefore submits that the fabrics cut by the applicant into sizes of the towels and napkins are to be treated as napkins and towels i.e. made-up articles rsquo . He therefore prays for dismissing the stay application. 4. emsp We have carefully considered the pleas advanced from both sides. We observe that the expression ldquo made-up rdquo has been defined exhaustively in Section Note 5 of Section XI as mentioned above. Going by that Section note, prima facie, we agree with the learned Advocate that cutting of the fabric even into the sizes of the towels and napkins will not amount to manufacture of a made-up article. Therefore the applicants have a strong prima facie case. We allow the stay petition unconditionally.
1998 (7) TMI 241 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT Versus KRISHNA INTERNATIONAL
Reference to High Court - Modvat ......
........... lfilled the first condition itself. The Tribunal set aside the demand confirmed on the ground that credit had been taken without obtaining prior permission of the Assistant Collector. 6. emsp In the case of Aqueous Victuals Ltd., the Tribunal rejected the plea of the DR that the language of Rule 57H as it stood at the relevant material time provided for permission of the Assistant Collector. Nevertheless, since the question framed is a question of law and since there is no pronouncement on this issue by any superior Forum, we are of the view that question of law requiring reference arises in this case and accordingly, forward the following question of law for consideration by the Hon rsquo ble Allahabad High Court - ldquo Whether under Rule 57H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, as it stood in April 1990, prior permission of the Assistant Collector is necessary before an assessee can avail credit of duty paid on the inputs rdquo . 7. emsp The Reference Application is allowed.
1998 (7) TMI 239 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
BRISK SURGICAL COTTON Versus COLLECTOR OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD
Absorbent cotton wool I.P. - Benefit of exemption under Notification No. 185/87-C.E. ......
........... e manufacturer rsquo s name and Drug Licence No. These are statutory requirements for all drugs including the aforesaid products. 12. emsp In the light of the above, we hold that the appellants are entitled to the benefit of exemption in terms of Notification No. 185/87. 13. emsp We also hold that demand is barred by limitation - the Superintendent of Central Excise Shri R.C. Parekh has confirmed in cross examination that the labels of the products were being filed along with the classification list in 1987, that the labels did not contain any brand name or logo and therefore, the classification list was approved extending the benefit of Notification 1985/87 (sic). In these circumstances, the appellants cannot be held guilty of any suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty since the classification lists were approved only after perusing the samples of the labels of the disputed products. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
1998 (7) TMI 238 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
COSMOS FERRITES LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDIGARH
Ferrite powder - Eligible for exemption under Notification No. 217/86-C.E. ......
........... n to earlier clearances. He submits that in the present case also, the Tribunal may be pleased to hold that amendment to Notification 186/75 and 217/86 may be held to be prospective in operation and the demand confirmed since they were for a period prior to the coming into effect of the amended notification. 4. emsp We have considered the submissions of both sides. We find that in an identical situation of the amendment to Notification 217/86 the Tribunal in the case of Indian Aluminium Co. cited supra has held that the amendment introducing the expression ldquo other than those cleared either to a 100 EOU or to a Unit in free trade zone rdquo is clarificatory in nature and such clarificatory notification has retrospective effect (see para 12 of the Indian Aluminium judgment). Since the issue is directly covered by this decision of the Tribunal, we hold that the appellants are entitled to the benefit of Notification 217/86, set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals.
1998 (7) TMI 237 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
ASSAM COTTON MILLS Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SHILLONG
Cotton fabrics in cross reel hanks cleared to registered co-operative societies, thereby fulfilling first condition of Notification No. 25/95-C.E. ......
........... notification. In the instant case, we find that the benefit has been denied only on this technical ground of the payments having been made by drafts instead of cheques. The fact that purchases have been made by the co-operative societies themselves, has not been denied by the department. In facts, they themselves held that the customers in the instant case, are co-operative societies themselves. We find ourselves fully convinced that the second condition of the notification stands substantially fulfilled in all the cases. In respect of two societies pointing out by the ld. JDR, the certificates by the societies are to the effect that the demand drafts have been issued by debiting their own funds. This fact has not been rebutted by the department at any stage. Accordingly, we feel that the conditions are substantially fulfilled even by these two co-operative societies. We set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with the consequential relief to the appellants, if any.
1998 (7) TMI 236 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
HEAVY ENGINEERING CORPN. LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF C. EX., PATNA
........... .11 crore have already been made and the matter settled in this regard. We are therefore, concerned at this stage only with the rest of the demand of Rs. 2.31 crore regarding which the appellants are aggrieved and to which they have confined their submissions before us in the course of hearing. 15. emsp So far as this amount (Rs. 2.31 crore) was concerned, the Department rsquo s side has not been able to meet the ld. Counsel rsquo s arguments squarely and clarify the position and the appellants are prepared to pay the amount actually found due after correct re-calculation on the basis of the relevant rate of duty applicable at the time of clearance and we consider that it is a very fair offer. 16. emsp In view of the above position, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for de novo consideration in accordance with law and the above observations after giving the appellants an opportunity of being heard in the matter. The appeal is allowed by way of remand.
1998 (7) TMI 235 - CEGAT, MADRAS
TAFE LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, TRICHY
........... e speed or capacity of tractors because that would bear upon the capacity of engine as well as gear box. The full width bumper is basically for security concerns while operating the vehicles. A deluxe seat for the driver or canopy with flash beagon light on the top again are only pheripheral modifications which do not change the nature of the product. The heavy duty tow hook is basically stronger tow which are required for tractors because the heavy baggage trolleys are to be used. Least of all, the nature changes merely because it is painted in the standard Indian Airlines colour, even other buyers of tractors always choose different colours available. We, therefore, find that the product is clearly not a works trucks and but tractors with very minor modifications which do not amount to changing its nature. 7. emsp In these circumstances, we find complete merit in the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The appeal succeeds with consequential relief. Ordered accordingly.
1998 (7) TMI 234 - CEGAT, MADRAS
METTUR TECHNICAL TRAINING CENTRE Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., MADRAS
Penalty - Clandestine removal ......
........... ems which are lying in their factory. Therefore, there is no question of interfering in the impugned order so far as the confirmation of duty demands are concerned. However, we notice that the appellants have made out a very strong case for waiver of penalty in the present case. The appellants have not deliberately removed the goods with an intention to evade duty. The appellants rsquo are not a commercial factory, but only a Training centre for students which is run on no-profit-no-loss rsquo basis. In respect of certain items cleared they contend that there was only a procedural lapse. The appellants have to deposit the duty at the very instance on the department rsquo s pointing out the same to them. In the overall facts and circumstance of the case, we reduce the penalty to Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) for various procedural lapses. The appellants shall deposit the duty which are due under this impugned order. The impugned order is modified accordingly.
1998 (7) TMI 232 - CEGAT, MADRAS
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI Versus INDIA PISTONS REPCO LTD.
Gear - Fly wheel starter ring gear ......
........... ority can apply his mind independently to all the points raised by both the sides. 3. emsp The learned Counsel does not have any objection for the matter being remanded. 4. emsp We have heard both the sides. On a careful consideration of the submissions, we notice that the aspect of the classification of the said item requires readjudication by the Assistant Commissioner in terms of the submissions made by the appellants and also in terms of the grounds made out by the revenue in this appeal, more particularly to the HSN Notes Heading 8405 at page 1152 and other points raised by the revenue. The Assistant Commissioner shall not be influenced by any of the observations made by the Commissioner (Appeals) and he should apply his mind independently and shall provide fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee and to consider the technical literature produced by them. 5. emsp Thus, the revenue appeal stands remanded to the original authority. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
1998 (7) TMI 230 - CEGAT, MADRAS
MRF LIMITED Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., GOA & CHENNAI
........... e citations of the tribunal led by him which holds classification on the same lines as the impugned order-in-original, he has been instructed to pray that the appeals may be permitted to be withdrawn as not pressed. 13. emsp In view of our aforesaid decisions in the other appeals (S.No. 1 to IV para 2 to 11) to apply the ratio of the said three decisions of the tribunal, we find that since the order-in-original itself is in consonance with three decisions of the tribunal as well as our own decisions contained above, therefore the prayer of the learned Senior Advocate for appellants merits consideration and the appeals are dismissed as not pressed. However, learned Sr. Advocate submitted that the said prayer is with liberty to file cross objections, in case at future date, the Revenue agititate this issue in any manner. We consider this prayer to be fair and accede to it. 14. emsp Therefore, all the 19 appeals are accordingly disposed of by this common order as recorded above.