2003 (7) TMI 360

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. - The above application  filed  by the  appellant is to raise additional grounds inasmuch as they have stated that - (1)     the Collector has gravely erred in ignoring the fact that the process of doubling/multifolding of single yarn was not a process of manufacture till the said process was introduced as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o adduce evidence in that regard as it would amount to fresh case as held in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd v. Collector - 2001 (138) E.L.T. 31 ( P & H ). Likewise, he has prayed for applying the ratio as rendered in the case of Magic Products v. Commr. - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 103 (Tri.-Chennai), wherein it has been held that the contention that even parts of oven are eligible for benefit of Notifica .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed before the Tribunal that process of doubling of single yarn does not amount to manufacture was held to be a question of law and it was allowed to be raised. He submits that all the judgments cited by DR pertained to facts which were not raised before the lower authorities and the Tribunal and the Court did not allow such facts to be raised. He submits that it is a well settled proposition and l .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X