9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (10) TMI 377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esident, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. 212/98 (MDU), dated 30-11-98 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Trichy. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents are manufacturers of spun yarn of synthetic staple fibre and artificial staple fibre falling under Chapter 55. They filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pun yarn. In view of this finding, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the original authority's order is not correct. In other words, he had set aside the finding that soft waste had arisen during the course of manufacture of spun yarn. 3. The relevant notification applicable is Notification No. 23/95-CE, dated 16-3-95. In view of the above finding, the Commissioner (Appeals), set aside the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ters 52 & 55 are exempt from payment of duty of excise. The adjudicating authority dismissed the plea of the respondents on the ground that the yarn emerged as intermediate product was dutiable but the manufacturer took a different plea before the Commissioner (Appeals) that waste in question had arisen only after the spinning of the yarn and in the course of manufacture of exempted fabrics. (c)& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fabrics which were exempt from duty. Hence he contended that there is nothing wrong in the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and his order needs to be sustained. 6. We have carefully gone through the case records and considered the submissions. The issue before us is not whether waste which has been cleared was soft waste or hard waste. The issue is whether it is exempt from payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
