TMI Blog1983 (8) TMI 292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In this Revision Application transferred to the Tribunal, to be disposed of as an appeal, the question for decision is classification of `Bare Aluminium Wires measuring 10 SWG or less under the Central Excise Tariff whether they should be classified under Tariff Item 33B (II) or Tariff Item No. 68 of Central Excise Tariff. 2. The appellants are manufacturers of AA/ACSR conductors. For the pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made from out of duty paid aluminium rods do not attract Central Excise duty. They requested for dropping the proceedings. The appellants did not request for personal hearing. The Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, Anantpur, by two orders bearing dated 25-8-1981, number 130/81 131/81 confirmed the demand. Two appeals filed to the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Madras were rejected by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B. Notification No. 90/82-C.E., dated 28-2-1982, under which wires would fall under T.I. 33B and would be exempt from the whole of duty of Excise. This Notification was rescinded by Notification No. 136/83-C.E., dated 30-4-1983. Notification No. 137/83-C.E., dated 30-4-1983, while exempting bare aluminium wires finer than 3.25 mm (10 SWG) described such wires as falling under T.I. No. 68 of C.E.T. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SDR contended that the orders passed by the lower authorities are correct but when confronted with the Tariff Advice of the C.B.E. C. only said that the same would not be binding on the Tribunal. 5. We have carefully considered the matter. Even though Tariff Advice may not be binding on the Tribunal, it would certainly be binding on the respondent and the Department. It appears to us that bare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
