9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (3) TMI 217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplication filed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Yeshwantpur Division, against the orders of the Assistant Collector himself in approving the classification list No. 4/87,1/88 and 2/88 dated 29-6-1988 and 17-12-1988, under Section 35E (4) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, under direction from the Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore 15-6-1989 with C. No. IV/3/182/89 under Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986. The only ground given for setting aside the Assistant Collector's order is that the respondents manufactured the rubber soles on job charges basis out of the raw materials supplied by M/s. Bata Ltd., Bangalore who is the principal manufacturer and that they themselves are not eligible for the exemption under the said notification. In support of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s already expired and that no duty can be recovered by circumventing the law by filing an appeal. Further, the respondents stated that the Supreme Courts' decision in the case of Sree Agency cited in the application is not applicable to them as in that case it was established through investigation that they were the real manufacturers and they had only paid higher charges to the powerlooms owners. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing themselves to any conditions. I also agree with them that the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Sree Agency is not applicable to them. As per the Supreme Court's latest judgment in the case of Ujagar Prints, the respondents has to be treated as manufacturers. Further, I observe that the time limit of six months stipulated under Section 11A has already expired and the statutory provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
