TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon ble Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial) And Hon ble Mr. H.K. Thakur, Member (Technical),JJ. For the Appellant : Shri P. P. Jadeja, Consultant For the Respondent : Shri L. Patra, Authorised Representative ORDER Per: H.K. Thakur 1. This appeal has been filed by the Appellant with respect to OIA No.78/2007(Ahd-I), dt.27.02.2007, under which the first Appellate Authority has confirmed the OIO dt.22.11.2006 passed by the Adjudicating authority. The issue involved in the present proceedings is whether National Calamity Contingency Duty (NCCD) is leviable on Partially Oriented Yarn (POY) and FDY when used captively in the manufacture of the goods falling under CETH 54.02 exempted under Notification No.46/2003-CE, dt.17.0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ove Order dt.10.06.2011 are reproduced below:- 2. The facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturing Polyester Chips falling under sub-heading 3907.60 of CETA, Partially Oriented Yarn (PTY) falling under sub-heading 5402.32 and Polyester Filament Yarn (PFY) falling under sub-heading 5402.52 of the CETA. The National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) was imposed @ 1% Adv. with effect from 01.03.2003 on the said goods as per Section 136 of the Finance Act, 2001 read with Clause 161 of the Finance Bill 2003 (now Section 169 of the Finance Act, 2003). It appeared that the exemption from the payment of National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) was not available to the manufacturer of the above goods cleared to 100% EOU. Further, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) 3. As regards clearances to 100% EOUs, he submits that in the case of Toyota Kirloskar Motor Pvt.Ltd. Vs CCE, Bangalore reported in 2007 (217) ELT 403 (Tri-Bang) = (2007-TIOL-1422-CESTAT-BANG), it was held that NCCD is not leviable in respect of goods cleared availing the benefit of Notification No. 108/95-CE, dt.28.08.95. He submits that ratio of this judgment can be applied for the purpose of clearance to 100% EOU also. 4. We find that as pointed by the learned Advocate, the issue is no more res integra and we also agree with the contention of the learned Advocate that the judgment of the Tribunal in relation to clearance under Notification No.108/95 can be applied and therefore, NCCD is not leviable in respect of clearance to 100 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
