TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 224X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can also be used & understood as floor coverings. The argument taken by the Revenue that floor coverings of jute should be exclusively used for floor covering is not supported by as such specific mention in the exemption notification. It has been correctly observed by the Adjudicating authority that jute mattings are neither specifically included in Sr. No. 1 nor excluded from Sr. No. 3 of the table annexed to Notification No. 29/95-CE dt 16/3/95. Revenue has also taken an argument that exemption to Jute Matting was available under earlier Notification No. 50/90-CE dt 20/3/90, therefore, Jute Mattings are different products. In this regard we observed that Notification No. 50/90-CE dt 20/3/90 does not say that Jute mattings are not floor co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e than 51% by weight of Jute Fabrics and paid 5% duty in terms of Notification No. 29/95-CE 16/03/1995 as per Sr. No. 3 of the table to this notification. That it is the case of the department that mattings manufactured by the Respondent are not floor coverings as these can also be used for packing purposes or table wall covering purposes. That it is not the case of the Respondent that mattings manufactured are exclusively used as floor coverings in order to avail 5% duty as per Sr. No. 3 of table to Notification NO. 29/95-CE dt 16/3/1995. That the period of demand is 16/3/1995 to 28/02/1997 and Notification No. 29/95-CE was rescinded from 23/7/96 and duty on the goods manufactured by the Respondent will be as per Sr. No. 1 of this notifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Central Excise schedule was amended with a view to build exemptions in the tariff itself matting manufactured by the Respondent continued to be levied to 5% duty. That in order to achieve the object another Notification No. 19/96-CE dt 23/7/1996 was issued till the Finance bill 1996 was enacted which was done by rescinding Notification No. 31/96-CE dt 28/09/96: That no duty for the period 23/07/96 to 28/02/97 can be demanded from the Respondent in excess of 5%. That Respondent was correctly entitled to exemption under Sr. No. 3 of Notification No. 29/95-EC as a specific entry always prevail over the general enteric as per the following case laws. (i) Moorco (India) Ltd Vs CC [1994 (74) ELT 5 (S.C.)] (ii) Supdt of Central E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1) (2) (3) 1. Carpets and other textile floor coverings, knitted, woven, tufted, or flocked, whether or not made up (excluding dari, sataranfi, namdahe, jute carpets and coir carpets) (i) in or in any relation to the manufacture of which any process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of machines. (ii) other 30% ad valorem Nil 2. Floor coverings of coir Nil 3. Floor coverings of jute 5% ad valorem 4. Hand-made carpets, whether or not any machines have been used to ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an also be capable for other uses. It is not the case of the Revenue that the goods manufactured by the Respondent can not be used at all as floor coverings. Accordingly we do not find any reason to interfere with the orders on merits passed by the Adjudicating authority. 5. On the issue of time bar nature of demand Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent argued that Adjudicating authority on page 8 of the OIO dt 8/8/2007 has clearly held that there was no deliberate act or willful misstatement on the part of the Respondent as departmental officer has approved classification list, after careful consideration. It is observed from the copy of said classification list, available on case records, that Respondent gave correct d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
