TMI Blog1997 (3) TMI 282X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f sample drawn on 17-5-1983 as well as on 29-8-1983 cannot be extended to allots during the period from May, 1983 to September, 1983. He said that results of sample are applicable to the sample which was drawn on a particular day or to a respective lot and not to the entire quantity during the period in question. In support of his contention he referred to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kiran Spinning Mills, Bombay v. C.C.E., Bombay, reported in 1988 (33) E.L.T. 137 wherein it was held that test result of sample drawn is applicable only to quantity of yarn spun out of blend from which sample was drawn. He submitted that this is the view of the Tribunal even in other two cases namely S.D. Kemexc Industries v. C.C.E., Calcutta [1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and August 1983 to September 1983 based upon the result of the samples drawn on 17-5-1983 and 29-8-1983. The result of the test of these samples drawn on these two particular dates is not applicable to the entire period in the absence of the sample drawn on each and every day during the period. It was also submitted by him that decision referred to by the learned DR are not applicable to the facts of this case since the decision in the case of Bojaraj Textile Mills referred to above, deals with the issue with reference to count of yarn. In this case, the issue was with reference to the count of blending yarn. 4. We have carefully considered the matter. We find that in the case of Bojaraj Textile Mills as well as in the case of Ramalinga C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... em in question consists of man-made fibres of non-cellulosic origin. We are not convinced with the argument advanced on behalf of the appellants that result of the sample drawn in respect of lot cannot be extended to the entire quantity during the period in question. In view of the ratio laid down by the Madras High Court in the cases referred to above, it is clear that result of the sample is applicable till new samples were drawn. Further, the cases referred to by the learned counsel in support of his contention has not been taken note of the decisions of the Madras High Court in arriving at the conclusion. The decision of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of The Chirala Co-operative Spinning Mills Ltd., is also not applicable since t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
