TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 665X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imported commodity. - C/861/2009 - A/12/2011-WZB/C-II(CSTB) - Dated:- 4-1-2011 - S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Sahab Singh, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri V.K. Singh, SDR, for the Appellant. Shri Deven Parikh, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. The short question arising for consideration in this appeal of the Revenue is whether the benefit of Notification No. 30/2004-C.E., dated 9-7-2004 as amended would be admissible to the respondent in respect of countervailing duty on the fabrics imported by them during the material period. The respondent had imported grey cotton fabrics in a consignment covered by one Bill of Entry and cotton/lycra fabrics in six consignments covered by six Bills of Entry duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere the condition attached thereto was not complied with. Particular reference has been made to the Tribunal s Larger Bench decision in Priyesh Chemicals and Metals Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2000 (120) 259 (Tri-LB), wherein it was held that the benefit of a conditional exemption notification was not admissible to a person who did not satisfy the condition. It is submitted that one of the inputs used in cotton/lycra fabrics is lycra filament manufactured out of the basic polyurethane polymer, an excisable commodity in India. It is submitted that lycra filament itself is chargeable to countervailing duty if imported into India. Therefore, a person claiming the benefit of the above notification in respect of the fabrics containing lycra fila ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e found force in the submissions of the learned counsel. The ratio of the decisions cited by the learned counsel is that, where the inputs contained in the imported commodity are shown to be not chargeable to duty of excise in India, there is no question of an Indian manufacturer of such commodity availing CENVAT credit and, consequently, there is no question of levy of countervailing duty on the imported commodity. It is not the case of the appellant that the ratio of the said decisions was not accepted by the department. It is also pertinent to note that, in the present appeal, the appellant has not claimed that any input used in the imported fabrics was classifiable under a Tariff Heading not included in the Table annexed to Notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
