TMI Blog2005 (8) TMI 159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearing HDPE bags by classifying the same under Heading 63.01 on payment of duty. It is seen that the dispute about the said HDPE bags was going on in the industry for a long time and was ultimately settled by the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Raj Pack Well Ltd. v. UOI as reported in 1990 (50) E.L.T. 201 holding that HDPE sacks are appropriately classifiable under Chapter 39 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the proper officer. The appeal by the Revenue against the said order did not succeed before the Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected the same while observing that the classification cannot be amended retrospectively and no demand can be raised for the past period of six months. Reliance was placed upon the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the case of H.M. Bags Manufacturer v. CCE - 1997 (94) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, duty can always be demanded for a period of six months prior to the issuance of the show cause notice. Such retrospective amendment of the Section 11A provisions was taken note of by the three Judges bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITW Signode India Ltd. v. CCE - 2003 (158) E.L.T. 403 (S.C.) and such retrospective amendment was approved of and it was held that Section 11A of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raised for a period of six months under Section 11A, but inasmuch as the respondents were not availing Modvat credit in respect of inputs as the duty was being paid under Chapter 63, which is not covered under the Modvat scheme, the duty now to be confirmed against the respondents has to be recalculated after giving the benefit of Modvat credit of duty paid in respect of inputs. The said credit is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
