2007 (12) TMI 42

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 34.01 and the sub-headings thereof are reproduced below:-    "3401 : Soap; organic surface-active products and preparations for use as soap, in the form of bars, cakes, moulded pieces or shapes, whether or not containing soap; paper, wading, felt and non-wovens, impregnated, coated or covered with soap or detergent Soap in any form:       3401.11 -- Soap, other than for toilet use, whether or not containing medicament or disinfectant.       3401.12 -- Soap, in or in relation to the manufacture of which, no process has been carried on with the aid of power or of steam.      3401.13 -- Laundry soaps produced by a factory owned by the Khadi and Village Industri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to storage tank had no connection with the process of manufacture of the assessee's product and therefore they were eligible for exemption under Notification No. 230/86-C.E., dated 3-4-1986, which had provided for exemption on condition that the process of manufacture be without aid of power. On the other hand, ld. SDR would rely on the Tribunal's decision in Mathanja Fabrics v. CCE, Jaipur [2002(142) E.L.T. 49 (Tri. - LB)], wherein it held that power had been used for lifting water and pouring the same in the kier and accordingly the benefit of Notification No. 137/77-CE (as amended) was denied to the bleaching process employed by the assessee. SDR has also claimed support from the Apex Court's judgment in CCE v. Rajasthan State Chemical W .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in the factory. The Tribunal held that the activity of transferring raw material from tanker lorries to storage tank in the factory was not a part of the process of manufacture of thinners. Accordingly the benefit of the Notification was granted to the assessee. The decision in Shalimar Paints (supra) squarely support the present appellants also. 4.  In the case of Mathania Fabrics (supra), the question was whether power was used in, or in relation to, the bleaching process undergone by grey cotton fabrics in the assessee factory. Power was found to have been used for lifting water and pouring it into kier and bleaching vessel. The Tribunal's Larger Bench held that this activity of lifting water and pouring the same in the kier and b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X