9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (4) TMI 174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : K. Prakash Anand, Member (T)]. - The facts in this case are that on 17-6-1983, appellants intimated the department that they proposed to pay Excise duty on Tyre Cord Fabrics (un-processed) under protest. On 2-5-1984, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellants that by virtue of Notification No. 156/83-CE dated 21-5-1983, it was quite clear that unprocessed Tyre Cord Fabrics ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld by the Collector (Appeals). It is against these orders that the appellants are now before us. 3. We have heard Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, Advocate, on behalf of the appellants and Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan, JDR for the department. 4. The learned Advocate has re-stated the reason why the appellants wanted to pay duty under protest. It is pointed out that the Hon ble Supreme Court had decided on 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on account of the apparent conflict in the decisions. It is submitted that all that the appellants asked for is that they may be permitted to await the outcome of the writ of DCM and in the meantime their letters of protest be kept pending. 5. Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan reiterates the view taken by the lower authorities. He emphasizes that the appellants are seeking to follow a peculiar procedure, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly analysed by the learned Collector (Appeals). The appellant s case is simply that there is a conflict in two orders passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, which affects their liability to duty. They hold that they are not liable. But unfortunately, this by itself does not entitle them to the benefit of the procedure under Rule 233B of Central Excise Rules, 1944. This rule clearly provides that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
