TMI Blog1988 (2) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er they have shewn Caprblacturrf, produced out of nylon Filament waste by a process of recycling such waste.^teideriwo headings. The second heading read waste of synthetic filaments falling under sub-heading No. 54W.10". They-had Blaiiriedth(r) same to.be free of duty under; Notification, 36/85-CE as amended by Notification 172/76-CE..Show cause notice dated 5.11.1986was issued to them with reference to the said classification list. After receipt of replythe AssistantCot-lector, Kanpur adjudicated the matter. Under order dated 19. M987-ne held that exemption claimed by the appellants was not available. He therefore, approved of the classification list with the modification that the exemption claimed in respect of above product was not avai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncerned it isen-titledto exemption under Notification 26/ -72-CE, dated .18.3.1972 if the same is used for recovery ofcaprolacturn. jn the classification list this waste, fallingunder sub;bpading 5410.10GET, is shown as Item No. 2 in page 3 of the, classification list, under the heading Particulars of other goods produced or manufactured and intended to be removed.by the assessee . The fact that no duty was payable thereon is not in issue before us. The issue before us relates to the liability for payment of duty on the caprolacturn produced out of the waste. The appellants claim that under Notification S6/85-C .,,dated 17.3.1985, as amended, the caprolaclum described bythem under Hem (ii)atpage2ofthe classification list was free of duty. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the nylon filament yam waste in Issue in the present case would be waste that had arisen during the manufacture of the nylon yam and hence the benefit claimed in the classification list was available to the appellants. 11. Both sides Have stated that this issue is not the subject matterof any decision Ofeither this Tribunal or any Court. We have therefore to decid whether the waste in issue i.e. the waste arising subsequent to emergence oftilament from the splnnerette but before beingwound on cops, wouldbe waste arising during the manufacture of nytonyam. In this connection Shri Santhanam relies on the meaning of the word During as given in Black s Law Dictionery (5th Edition) at page 453. The meaning given is Throughout the course of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istant Collector [confirmed subsequently by the Collector (Appeals)] that the waste thatoecurred after emergence of the filament, but before the same is wound oh the cops, is not-waste arising during the course of manufacture of nylon yarn, is not correct. 13. That would mean that the exemption claimed in the classification list was available to the assessee and the refusal thereof by the lower authorities was incorrect. It would therefore foUow that the-dassrfication list ought to be approved as filed and not with the modification ordered by tj-ie Assistant Collector. 14. This would therefore mean that the order of the Collector (impugned in Excise Appeal 3247/87-D) is also liable to be set aside so far as theduty demanded therein is c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
