9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (2) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Respondents. [Order per : Shri V.K. Asthana, Member (T)]. - These appeals are against common Order-in-Appeal Nos. 31 & 32/94(c), dated 8-3-1994 in which Order-in-Original Nos. 14/93 & 15/93 dated 23-12-1993 has been upheld. The issue concerns availability of duty exemption under Notification No. 170/89-C.E., dated 16-8-1989 for the periods 1-6-1989 to 15-8-1989 and 1-1-1989 to 31-5-1989 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld that mere stranding of wires is not manufacture; (iii) Notification No. 170/89 is only clarificatory in nature as held by CCE, Chandigarh in the case of Aeron Steel Rolling Mills : (iv) and that the issue was covered by 1995 (80) E.L.T. 368 (T) - Apex Steels 1996 (83) E.L.T. 605 (T) - Gautam Cables; and &n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g. (iv) Revenue contends that in view of there being nothing in 170/89 to show retrospective applicability, demands are correctly confirmed, while appellants argue on two main grounds :- (a) Notification No. 170/89 only sets right the suspected lacuna in 202/88. Hence it is only clarificatory and is to be applied with retrospective effect, as has been done by CCE, Chandiga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umber of case-laws were examined before passing this judgment. Therefore, on the ground that Notification No. 170/89 is only clarificatory in nature and therefore having retrospective effect, the ratio of this decision is clearly applicable to the facts of this case and hence the Order-in-Appeal impugned is liable to be set aside. (vi) Since it is held above that the appellants are enti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
