TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Registered as Unit A and Unit B . The appellants contend that almost 75% of the single yarn manufactured by the appellants at both the units is cleared by them on payment of duty for sale. The remaining 25% of the single yarn is cleared to their own units, known as Unit D and Standard General Finance Ltd. for the purpose of undertaking the processes of doubling, gassing, reeling, mercerising etc. The yarn after being subjected to the above processes, is received back in its entirety by the sending unit (subject to the invisible losses) packed in cartons and thereafter cleared for export under bond or on payment of duty in the domestic market. They were availing the facility of procedure prescribed under Rule 96E of CE Rules which perm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cessing has been exported and the terms of Rule 19(2) of CE Rules would be applicable and no duty demand can be made. In this regard, they rely on the judgment rendered in the case of Kansal Knitwears v. CCE, Chandigarh - 2001 (136) E.L.T. 467 (Tri.-Del.) and the Constitutional Bench judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Thermax Private Ltd. v. CC - 1992 (61) E.L.T. 352 (S.C.).and that of the Mangalore Chemicals Fertilizers Ltd. v. DC - 1991 (55) E.L.T. 437 (S.C.). Their further contention is that provisions of Rule 96E continues in Central Excise Rules, 2001. The last ground taken is that the entire demand is revenue neutral and rely on the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of (i) Amco Batteries Ltd. v. CCE - 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otton yarn on which the said duty of excise was not being levied during the aforesaid period in accordance with the said practice : Provided that exemption contained in this notification shall be applicable only if the processed cotton yarn has been accounted for and disposed of in accordance with the Central Excise law. 5. In view of this, we clearly hold that duty is not demandable in the present case. Furthermore, we also see that the appellants contention that they have cleared the goods from one unit to another and demands are not enforceable as the goods had been exported is also well taken ground in terms of the submissions made and the judgments cited by them. In view of the stated position, the impugned order is set aside and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
