TMI Blog2003 (11) TMI 108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by the respondent allowing the appeal, is the subject-matter of challenge of this Reference Application filed by the applicant. 3.The relevant facts for the purpose of disposal of this Reference Application are as under : The respondent is engaged in manufacture of hybrid seeds. According to the applicant, the respondent is also engaged in manufacturing of cotton cloth bags. The hybrid se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a manufacturer as defined under the Central Excise Act, 1944. 4.The respondent did not pay the duty. Hence, show cause notice was served on the respondent. The Department claimed the duty to the tune of Rs. 95,07,680/- for a period from April, 1996 to September, 2000. The show cause notice was replied by the respondent and denied the demand. 5.After hearing, the Commissioner, Central Excise, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise and Customs, Aurangabad mainly relied upon the case of Bajrang Gopilal Gajabi [1986 (25) E.L.T. 609 (S.C.)]. In the said case, yarn was supplied to the powerlooms by one Tejpal for and on behalf of Gajabi. The cloth was manufactured from such yarn by the powerloom owners for and on behalf of Gajabi and the powerloom owners received only labour charges. Under the peculiar facts of that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces of the case by the Commissioner. 11.The Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ujagar Prints (referred supra) is the judgment by Bench consisting of five Judges. The judgment in the case of Bajrang Gajabi (referred supra) is of Division Bench. Therefore, the CEGAT preferred to rely on the case of Ujagar Prints (cited supra) and allowed the appeal filed by the respondent. Under the circ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
