1990 (6) TMI 185

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s appeal is directed against the impugned order-in-appeal dated 20-6-1984 passed by the Collector (Appeals), Calcutta. 2. Factual structure of the case is that the appellants M/s. Kamarhatty Co. Ltd., Kamarhatty, holder of Central Excise Licence are Jute Manufacturers namely Fabrics and bags falling under T.I. 22A(1) and 22A(2) respectively. According to the department the appellants paid duty o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... show cause notices. Against that order of the Assistant Collector the appellants filed their appeal before the Collector of Appeals, Calcutta but without success. Hence the present appeal. 3. We have heard Shri B.B. Gujral, learned Counsel for the appellants and Shri L.C. Chakravarti, learned JDR for the respondents. 4. At the outset Shri B.B. Gujral, learned Counsel for the appellants submit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... supra) relates to levy of cess during the period from 1-5-1984 to 30-9-1984 after coming into force of the Jute Manufactures Cess Act, 1983 which came into effect from 1-10-1984. 5. We have considered the submissions. It is not in dispute that the appellants manufactured Hessian and Sacking and captively used them for the purpose of manufacturing Hessian bags and sacking bags after payment o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X