Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2005 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (12) TMI 171 - AT - Central ExciseWrongly availed the benefit of concessional duty - Fabrics of cotton and man-made fabrics - Demand - Limitation - Suppression of facts - HELD THAT:- On our independent examination also, we have clearly seen from the technical literature produced that the item PVA is not a raw material but it is a consumable. The Encyclopedia of Textile Finishing also clearly spells out that the Polyvinylalcohol dispersions is significantly decreased by heating treatment above 120°C application particularly for sizes, finishes, etc. The definition of sizing in Sevak's Dictionary of Textiles also shows that sizing is an operation carried out on warp yarn before weaving to increase the weaving efficiency by reducing the yarn breakage during weaving. It states that this is done by preventing the surface-protruding fibres of yarn. For this purpose, the fibres extending along the yarn surface are coated with a thin layer of starch, tallow, china clay, etc. It is carried out by immersing the yarn for a few seconds in a hot mixture of an adhesive (starch, carboxy methyl cellulose, polyvinyl alcohol etc.). A lubricant and softner C tallow, emulsified vegetable oils and their solubilised products a preservative (pentachlorophenol, sodium silicofluoride, etc.). The yarns are then squeezed and dried. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Arvind Mills Ltd. v. UOI [1981 (7) TMI 78 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD] has held that sizing is necessary for weaving purposes after the yarn is completely manufactured. It has held that sizing process is carried out to add some strength to the yarn to withstand stress and strain of weaving. The sizing so added is removed completely after weaving and bleaching process to make the fibre suitable for dyeing, printing, etc. This Bench in the case of Forbes Gokak Ltd. [2005 (7) TMI 234 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] has held that application of wax on the fibre is used as a consumable and not as raw material. In view of the material placed before us, the contention of the appellant that PVA is not used as a raw material is required to be upheld. The appellants are entitled to the concessional benefit of the Notification in question. Further more, the appellant had declared that they were using the material with full knowledge of the Department. Hence there is no suppression of facts for invoking larger period. The appeal is allowed both on merits as well as on time bar with consequential relief if any.
|