TMI Blog2006 (10) TMI 367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ber (J)]. In this application filed by the department (appellant in the above appeal), it is contended to the effect that the final order passed by this Bench is erroneous for the reason that the appellant s grievance against availment of proforma credit by the respondents for the purpose of payment of duty on doubled/multifolded yarns (final products) for the period of dispute was not addre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt to manufacture and hence the goods in question were not dutiable. This conclusion is erroneous. It is also submitted that the Revenue s appeal ought not to have been dismissed. Learned SDR prays for amendment of the final order in keeping with the decision of the Supreme Court. 2. There is no representation for the party today. However, their written submissions are available on record. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he aforesaid Final Order No. 2344/99 [2000 (124) E.L.T. 274 (Tri.)] of the Tribunal that the Hon ble Supreme Court [2005 (183) E.L.T. 238 (S.C.)] held that the process undertaken by the assessee during the material period did not amount to manufacture . The party has claimed that they had not availed any proforma credit. Furthermore, they have asserted that any such credit cannot be availed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment in our final order to this effect only. 4. Accordingly, we substitute the following para for para-3 of Final Order No. 1464/2005 dated 2-11-2005 in appeal No. E/400/99 :- After considering the submissions, we find that as the process of doubling/multifolding of yarns undertaken by the assessee during the period of dispute did not amount to manufacture and the resulting products (double ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
