9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 328X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) arising in the course of manufacture of polyurethane foam blocks were entitled to the benefit of the exemption Notification 53/88 or 54/88 for the period in question. It is the contention of the appellant that WPS of polyurethane foam were covered by Notification 54/88 and not 53/88. The submission is that the WPS of flexible polyurethane foam (PUF) had been specifically excluded from Notification 53/88 (serial No. 42) and has been dealt with expressly in exemption Notification 54/88. 2. The Tribunal was of the opinion that both the Execution Notifications applied to the WPS of PUF and that since a greater benefit was conferred on the assessee by Notification 53/88, the Revenue was bound to grant such greater benefit to it. 3.&emsp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Table, subject to the conditions, if any, laid down in the corresponding entry in column (5) of the said Table. NOTIFICATIONS TABLE Sl.No. Heading No. Description of goods Rate Conditions (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 01 39.09 Polyurethanes in primary form, other than polyurethane foam, in any primary form. 40% ad valorem 02 39.09, 39.15. 39.21, 39.23, 39.24, 39.25 or 39.26 Flexible polyurethane foam, all goods of flexible polyurethane foam, waste, parings and scrap of flexible polyurethane foam. Rs. 40 per kilogram 03 39.15, 39.21 39.23, 39.24 39.25 or 39.26 All goods of flexible polyurethane foam, waste, parings and scrap of flexible polyurethane foam. Nil If,-- (1) the said goods are manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alf of one or more manufacturers, at the rate specified in column (4), shall not exceed 10% of the total production of flexible polyurethane foam and articles thereof falling under heading No. 39.09, 39.20 or 39.21 of the said Schedule during the immediately preceding month". 5. According to the assessees/respondents the WPS in question would be covered by Sl. No. 3. It is further submitted that the latter portion of Sl. No. 2 as it originally stood as well as Sl. No. 3 and Sl. No. 6 as introduced in 1989 were identical. The difference was in the rate of duty based on the fulfilment of conditions under Sl. No. 3 6. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant does not dispute that the WPS in question would be covered under Sl. No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
