TMI Blog1995 (12) TMI 142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondents. [Order per : Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)]. Appeal No. E/3053/86-C is directed against the Order No. M/178/AUR-20/86, dated 17-3-1986 of Collector (Appeals), Bombay. 2. A. No. E/798/89-C is directed against order dated 10-4-1989 of Additional Collector, Aurangabad. 3. Issue in both these cases falls within the narrow compass :- admissibility of exemption in case of Steam, unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shreepur could not be given the benefit of exemption . He submits that Collector (Appeals) has erred in holding that Assistant Collector could not review his orders. The well settled position in law is that classification list can always be changed prospectively and demand of duty cannot go beyond six months. In the present case since extended period was not invoked the fact that earlier order of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of alcohol which is not excisable item, the exemption specified under the Notification is not available to them. In other words, the main charge against the respondents is that M/s. Brima Sugar factory supplied steam to the Brihan Maharashtra Sugar Syndicate Ltd., a factory which does not conform to definition of factory given in Section 2(e) of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 for the reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elatable to their case directly. In view of this the Revenue cannot rely on grounds not mentioned in the Show Cause Notice. 6. The main grounds of appeal of Revenue are that two factories are separate factories and procedure under Chapter 10 was not followed. From the Show Cause Notice we find that it was proposed to deny exemption to M/s. Brima Sugar Limited on the ground only that they produce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
