1998 (7) TMI 319 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Demand of duty for clandestine clearance of goods
- Wrongful availment of benefit of notification
- Confiscation of goods
- Imposition of penalty

Analysis:
- The case involves an appeal against the confirmation of a duty demand for clandestine clearance of goods and wrongful availment of a notification benefit. The Commissioner also ordered the confiscation of goods and imposed a penalty on the appellants. The appellants challenged this order before the tribunal.

- Central Excise Officers conducted checks at the factory and office premises of the appellants, leading to the discovery of incriminating evidence. The appellants were found to have evaded duty and wrongfully availed benefits. Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued to the assessees.

- The appellants argued that the items in question were covered under the definition of cotton fabrics in the tariff, and since duty was already paid on the raw materials as cotton fabrics, demanding duty again on the manufactured items would amount to double taxation. They contended that the duty should not be payable on bed sheets, bed spreads, and table cloths.

- The Revenue contended that the process of converting raw materials into finished goods amounted to manufacture, citing relevant judgments. They argued that duty could be demanded on the manufactured items separately, even if duty was paid on the raw materials.

- The tribunal analyzed the tariff definition of cotton fabrics and concluded that bed sheets, bed spreads, and table cloths fell under this category. Since duty was already paid on the raw materials as cotton fabrics, no further duty should be payable on the manufactured items. The penalty imposed was considered excessive and reduced.

- The tribunal modified the impugned order, holding that no additional duty was payable on the manufactured items and reducing the penalty imposed on the appellants. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.