9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1858X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es, 1944 read with Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944, along with imposition of penalty of Rs. 75,000 under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944 has a hoary past. 2. Learned Consultant informs us that this dispute, before the Tribunal for the third time, commenced with notice issued on 7th February, 1995 alleging that the appellant, claiming to be outside the scope of coverage under Central Excise Act, 1944 as a processor undertaking printing and stentering of 'terry towel fabric' without aid of power for M/s. Yale Intex, was indeed, by reason of 'In relation to products of Sub-Heading No. 5802.12 bleaching, dyeing, printing or any other process or any 2 or more of these processes shall amount to manufacture' being Note 7 i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peration is carried on with the aid of power, the process in Orange relation to the manufacture must be deemed to be one carried on with the aid of power. In this view of the matter, we are unable to accept the contention that since the pumping of the brine into the salt pans or the lifting of coke and limestone with the aid of power does not bring about any change in the raw material, the case is not taken out of the notification. ' and of the Tribunal in Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-V v. Dhanesh Textile Ind. Pvt. Ltd. [2008 (227) E.L.T. 594 (Tri. - Mum.)] on similar lines, held that the note supra applied to the use of power for printing and stentering by the appellant herein. It was also noticed that, despite specific directio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in Chapter 58 relied upon by the adjudicating authority. 7. We have heard Learned Author Representative. 8. We find that the appellant, if undertaking the two processes without aid of power, would not be liable to duties of excise as a manufacturer. It is not in dispute that the appellant works on running the length of fabric which is printed and stenterized. It would appear from the findings that the allegation of use of power has been upheld solely because light is used for inspection of the printed fabric. That, in our opinion, is not the intent of the said note in chapter which must be inextricably connected with the process. It has been held in re Swastik Dyeing & Bleaching Factory that, insofar as cotton fabric is concer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
