9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (6) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... carding, combing etc. Slivers are the outcome of carding and/or combing machines in the Spinning Department. The appellants, thus, prepared cotton/polyester blended slivers mainly for captive use in the manufacture of yarn and fabrics therefrom and since they have cleared small quantity of slivers, they paid the duty thereon. Subsequently, refund claim was filed by them on the ground that they are not dutiable. The refund claim was rejected by the lower authorities on the ground that the slivers manufactured by the appellants is having distinct name, character, use and marketability and are correctly classifiable under Tariff Item 68. 3. When the matter has come up for final hearing, none appeared for the appellants. However, we find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tations in support of their contention : (a) 1977 (1) E.L.T. (J 199) S.C. - (DCM) (b) 1985 (20) E.L.T. 257 Madras - (Corromandel) (c) 1985 (21) E.L.T. 889 Tribunal - (Anil Chemicals) (d) 1980 (6) E.L.T. 696 Bombay - (Sandoz) (e) 1982 (10) E.L.T. 370 Madras - (Madura Coats) 4. Shri M.K. Jain, ld. SDR, for the Revenue while justifying the impugned order submitted that decision referred to by the other side in the case of M/s. Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd., Ahmedabad in Revision No. 933/80, dated 24-9-80 passed by the Govt. of India is not applicable to this case because of the fact that therein the slivers used for further manufacture in an integrated process and do not for sale. Accordingly, it was held that it was not marke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive name, character and use. Since the slivers have the same characteristic and uses as that of fibre and department had not established with any evidence to show that sliver is a different and distinct commodity/fibre not only in name but also in character and use, the department was not justified in charging the duty on slivers. Accordingly, the appellants succeed on this issue. But we find that the Collector (Appeals) has observed that the refund claim filed by the appellants are partly time-barred. On the other hand, the appellants have taken a plea in the ground of appeal that they have paid duty under protest in respect of clearance of said slivers. Accordingly, the refund claim was in time. Since the Collector has not discussed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
