TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 949X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ves an undertaking to the jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner having jurisdiction over the job work’s factory, that the said goods manufactured by the job worker shall be used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products in his factory and duty liability in respect of the same shall be discharged by him. In this case, no such undertaking given by the principal manufacturer has been produced. Moreover, we also find that while the goods manufactured by the appellants are the goods of Chapters 54 and 55, the Col. 2 mentioning the goods manufactured as job work eligible for exemption, does not cover the goods of Chapters 54 and 55. In view of this, the exemption under Notification No. 214/86-C.E. was not available to the single ply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le yarn of Syncotex staple fibre falling under 55.04 and artificial staple yarn falling under 55.06 of the Tariff could be cleared for captive consumption without payment of duty, but w.e.f. 20-5-1994 third proviso to Rule 9(1), and sub-rule (4) of the Rule 49 were omitted vide Notification No. 23/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 20-4-1994 and by issuance of Notification No. 121/94-C.E., dated 11-8-1994, the position as prevailing prior to 20-5-1994 were restored providing exemption to the single ply spun yarn made out of synthetic staple or artificial staple fibre and cleared for captive consumption for the purpose of doubling and mutli-folding; and (b) Thus, during the period from 20-5-1994 to 10-8-1994 single ply spun yarn made out of the sy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... solved nor the clearance for filing the appeal against the Commissioner s order was given by the Committee on Disputes. The order however made it clear that the appellant are at liberty to apply for restoration when the clearance is granted. 3. The appellant filed a Miscellaneous Application No. E/ROA/76/ 11-Ex (BR) for restoration of the appeal on the ground that while the Committee on Disputes has not taken any decision, the requirement of seeking permission from High Powered Committee on Disputes for filing appeal before the Tribunal or any other court has been done away with by the Apex Court vide judgment in the Electronics Corporation Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2011 (3) SCC 404 = 2011 (265) E.L.T. 11 (S.C.) = 2011 (21) S.T.R. 593 (S.C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cause notice issued to M/s. Super Syncotex from which it would appear that the show cause notice is for demand of duty in respect of the yarn received by them from the appellant and that no evidence has been provided by the appellant to show that the duty liability in respect of the yarn manufactured by the appellant have been discharged by M/s. Super Syncotex, the principal manufacturer. He, therefore, pleaded that there is no infirmity in the impugned order. 6. We have considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. The Notification No. 214/86-C.E. exempts the goods specified in Col. 2 of the Table annexed to the notification manufactured in a factory as a job work and used in or in relation to the manufacture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
