9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 1029X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M(BR) [2008 (222) E.L.T. 210 (Tribunal)] whereby the Tribunal dismissed the appeal preferred by the Revenue and affirmed the order dated 31-8-2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeal-II), Customs and Central Excise, Jaipur in Appeal No. 488 (HKS) CE/JPR-II/2005. 2. Briefly put, the relevant facts and background aspects of the matter are that the assessee Stainless India Limited, Tanawada, Jodhpur had cleared S.S. Flats falling under sub-heading No. 7220.10 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 without payment of duty in terms of the Notification No. 42/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001 to Rama Sheet Pvt. Ltd. for conversion into S.S. Cold Rolled Patta on job work basis. These S.S. Cold Rolled Pattas were also cleared without payment of du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the order dated 31-8-2005 with the following observation and findings :- "8. I have gone through the case records and submissions of the appellants, I find that the following facts are not in dispute : (i) that the goods were removed under Bond with the permission of the department. (ii) that the goods after processing have been cleared for export proof of which have been filed by the appellants. (iii) that as per Board's Circular No. 603/40/2001-CX., dated 29-11-2001 issued in reference to Board's earlier Circular No. 106/17/95-CX., dated 2-3-95, it has been clarified that the manufacturer of chasis may be allowed to furnish bond in behalf of the body builde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondents. Revenue's appeal is accordingly rejected." 5. Aggrieved, the Revenue has come up in this appeal under Section 35G of the Act of 1944 and it is contended that for the provision of Notification dated 26-6-2001 did not allow clearance of goods, i.e., S.S. Flats manufacture for conversion into S.S. Cold Rolled Pattas; and, subsequently, such Cold Rolled Pattas were manufacture for conversion into Utensils. It is submitted that a complete manufacture of goods was undertaken by both the job workers and hence, Board's circular was not applicable to such goods. It is contended that though the goods were removed with the permission of the Deputy Commissioner but when the discrepancy was brought to the notice, remedial measures wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
