TMI Blog1988 (5) TMI 172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent. [Order per : G. Sankaran, Senior Vice-President]. - The respondents are manufacturers of kraft paper falling under Item No. 17 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. They filed a classification list No. 14/82 seeking excise duty exemption under Notification No. 128/77 dated 18.6.1977 with effect from 24.1.1983. Subsequently, they filed another classificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y, Departmental Representative, for the appellant-Collector and Shri G. Prabhakara Sastry, advocate, for the respondents. 3. There is no dispute that the respondents started commercial production only in the last week of January 1983. There is also no dispute that the value of their clearances during the year 1982-83 was well within the limit stipulated in Notification No. 80/80. The grounds on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would not exceed Rs. 7.5 lakhs should be deemed to be a valid declaration under clause 3(a) of Notification No. 80/80. 4. Notification No. 80/80 does not prescribe stipulations with reference to the value of plant and machinery installed in the factory nor with reference to the installed/licensed capacity of the factory. The condition for eligibility is that the aggregate value of clearances of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondents letter addressed to the Superintendent of Central Excise. The Collector (Appeals), in our opinion, has correctly held that though the covering letter was addressed to the Superintendent, the declaration should be deemed to have been filed with the Assistant Collector, since the covering letter with the classification list had been submitted to the Assistant Collector for approval. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
