9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 450X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Rs. 28 crores confirmed against the appellant-company (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) by the Commissioner of Central Excise in adjudication of a show-cause notice dated 6-6-2008, which had raised the demand of duty for the period 9-7-2004 to 6-4-2008 by invoking the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. The assessee's appeal also challenges the penalties imposed on them under Section 11AC of the Act read with Rules 25 and 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. There is also a challenge against the seizure of certain quantity of tops valued at over Rs. 33 lakhs as well as against its subsequent confiscation ordered under Rule 25 of the said Rules. Incidentally, the redemption fine of Rs. 3 lakhs imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for producing goods of Headings 55.01, 55.02, 55.03 and 55.04. The dispute before the lower authority was whether the filament tow could be treated as "staple fibres" for purposes of the above Notification. The learned Commissioner decided on this question against the assessee and hence the impugned order. 3. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the issue stands settled by the Hon'ble High Court in the assessee's own Writ Petition No. 2931 of 2008. He has also produced a copy of the Hon'ble High Court's judgment vide Raymond Ltd. v. UOI - 2009 (240) E.L.T. 180 (Bom.). It is submitted that the above writ petition was filed by the assessee challenging a portion of the entry at serial No. 10 of the Table annexed to Notifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'ble High Court on the applicability of the Exemption Notification to the subject-goods and the same has got to be followed by this Tribunal inasmuch as the direction of the Hon'ble High Court is to decide on the aforesaid issue in accordance with "law" which includes "case law". In its order dated26-4-2010, the Hon'ble High Court fixed a time-limit for us to dispose of these appeals and, today, we are following this direction as well. 5. In view of the Hon'ble High Court's judgment dated 16-6-2009 in Writ Petition No. 2931 of 2008 [reported in 2009 (240) E.L.T. 180 (Bom.)], we hold that no duty of excise is recoverable from the assessee on the subject-goods for the period of dispute owing to the exemption available to them under seri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... existing entry, viz. serial No. 10 ibid. The suggestion of the learned JCDR was that the task of this interpretation be left to the original authority. We would have thought of a remand, had any question of fact been cited by the learned JCDR for better decision. But we are not inclined to remand the question of law (as framed by the learned JCDR) to the lower authority inasmuch as, for the period of dispute, the same question stands settled at the High Court level. It is for the Revenue to agitate the issue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
7. For the reasons already recorded, we set aside the impugned order and allow these appeals. The cross-objections also stand disposed of.
(Pronounced in Court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
