TMI Blog1987 (6) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... already captively consumed and the remaining 36 were in stock. The Supdt. was of opinion that these articles fell under TI 51-A(iv) CET and since they had been manufactured without taking out a proper Central Excise licence therefor, and had been cleared without payment of duty thereon, the appellants had contravened the relevant statutory provisions. The stock on hand was accordingly seized and notice dated 19-5-1981 was issued. After receipt of reply and on adjudication the Assistant Collector held under his order dated 22-12-1981 that the articles were classifiable under TI 61-A (iv) [3]CET and therefore the charges were established. He demanded a sum of Rs. 1,779.75 paise as duty payable on the 49 Nos. manufactured. He ordered confisca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on Carbide India Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras (1984 Vol. 3 ETR 56). They have also referred to various technical authorities in their revision petition as supporting the said contention. 4. The Assistant Collector in his order has pointed out that even according to the appellants the said cutting die assembly is made up of these die-inserts which in the nomenclature of their American collaborators are known as Front knife and Side knives and this would therefore establish that the front cutter knives and side cutting knives are known in the trade as knives. He has further relied on the fact that the purpose served by these items is the cutting operation which is the normal purpose for which a knife is used. But the Assist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... horities are to be set aside on this question of classification. The appellants have further pleaded that under Notification No. 321/77-C.E., dated 21-11-1977, goods falling under TI 51-A(iii) CET are exempt from the whole of the excise duty leviable thereon if they are captively consumed within the factory of production. We have already seen that the show cause notice proceeded on the basis that 13 of the 49 Nos. manufactured had been captively consumed. Therefore so far as these 13 items are concerned there would have been no question of duty liability in view of the said notification. Though the appellants pleaded that their entire production of these goods was for their special needs and the entire production was therefore being captive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
