9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (2) TMI 299X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erein have been sold by them as technical grade (TG) urea which fall under a different Tariff Item 68 CET as against fertilisers falling under Tariff Item 14HH. Urea [fertiliser grade (FG)] manufactured by the respondents had been initially accounted for in the production stock register (R.G. 1) meant for fertilisers. Later on, whenever they got an order for purchase of TG urea, they transferred the urea FG to urea TG and thereafter they sold it after payment of duty under Tariff Item 68. The appellant-Collector s case is that inasmuch as the inputs, namely Ammonia, furnace oil and LSHS have been used not for the manufacture of urea FG but for the manufacture of urea TG, the duty payable on such inputs which had been exempted under the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n support of her argument, the learned advocate submits the IS specifications of urea TG and urea FG under IS 1781-1975 and IS 5406-1979. A tabular comparison of the specifications of the two products is given below :- IS 1781-1975 Urea TG White prills or crystals between 0.85 mm and ......... Sieve. IS 5406-1979 Urea FG Prills (pellets or shorts) between 1 mm and 2.8 mm Sieve. (i) Moisture %age Max. 0.5 1.00 (ii) Nitrogen %age Min. 46.00 46.00 (iii) Biuret %age Max. 0.8 1.5 (iv) Free ammonia Max. 0.015 v) Ammonium Salts Max. 0.01 (Vi) Residue, on ignition. (vi) Residue, on ignition. 0.002 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt or suppression of fact, therefore, did not arise. Hence the normal time limit of six months would be applicable, if at all, the first submission of the respondents is not accepted by the Tribunal. She submits that provisions of the Act should be considered to override the provisions of any rule made under the Act. 3. At the outset, we may mention that the citations quoted by the counsels on both sides are not relevant so far as the main issue of applicability of the notifications is concerned. We have carefully considered the pleas advanced on both sides. We are inclined to agree with the pleas of the respondents learned advocate. Her submissions that there is no difference between the urea FG and urea TG inasmuch as the latter coul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
