9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (8) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid additional duty of customs under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act (CTA) with reference to imports of raw-materials used by them in the manufacture of parts of footwear (i.e.) Polyol and Isocyanate, under Item 15-A CET and they were therefore entitled to benefit under the above said notification. This claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector under his order dated 29-12-1983. On appeal the said order was set aside by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) under his order dated 12-3-1985. It is against the said order that the Collector of Central Excise, Pune has filed the present appeal. 2. We have heard Shri K.C. Sachar for the Appellant Collector and Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, Advocate for the respondents. 3. Notification N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of addi tional duty of customs also entitled benefit being claimed in respect of such payment for exemption. The said notification read as follows : "In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts footwear and parts thereof, falling under Item No. 36 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon under Section 3 of the said Act, subject to the condition that the contents of artificial or synthetic resins or plastic materials or both falling under Item No. 15-A of the said First Schedule, and used in the manufacture of such footwear and parts thereof are not less tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise Duty only. In this connection we "may refer to the decision of this Tribunal in the case of United Metal Industries [1985 (28) E.L.T. 404)]. The above view, that the reference to payment of duty in notifications issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules would be reference to payments of Central Excise duty only and not the equivalent additional duty of customs was upheld in that decision. We are in respectful agreement with the said decision. In that view we hold that the payment of additional duty of customs under Item 15-A CET in the present instance would not entitle the appellants to claim benefit under Notification 268 of 1967. 8. We accordingly uphold the impugned order and dismiss this appeal. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
