9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (11) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : Lajja Ram, Member (T)]. Shri S.V. Arya, Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants M/s. U.P. Twiga Fibreglass Ltd. submitted that the appellants had prima facie a strong case on merits inasmuch as the matter relates to the duty liability on glass waste which is not specifically mentioned in the Central Excise Tariff. The Revenue had classified the glass waste also along ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue had taken as Glass fibre/wool waste under sub-heading 7014.00" as discussed in the Order-in-Original No. 33/97, dated 30-1-1997. The Adjudicating Authority in that order had referred to the Tribunal s decision in the case of C.C.E. v. Dunlop India Limited - 1988 (36) E.L.T. 329. Reference has also been made to a number of other decisions of the High Courts, Supreme Court and the Tribunal. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hing that is sold may not be considered as marketable. We are unable to appreciate this distinction between the sale and the marketability. We find that the goods have been sold of course at different prices. The appellants have shown us some invoices relating to continuous fibre wastes glass wool wastes which had been sold to different customers. It has been explained that these goods may be havi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
