9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .C. Jain, Member (T)]. In the show cause notice dated 26-8-1991 issued to the appellant firm herein, the allegations were made by the Revenue that the appellants were manufacturing various items from the raw materials supplied by M/s. SAIL, Bokaro and such goods were alleged to be classifiable under sub-heading 7308.90 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It was also alleged that the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no small-scale exemption benefit under the said notification can be extended to the appellants. Consequently, a demand of duty for Rs. 50,221.00 was proposed to be recovered from the appellants for the financial year, 1987-88. 2. On adjudication, the aforesaid demand has been confirmed by the adjudicating authority. Hence this appeal by the Revenue before us. 3. Learned Advocate, Shri N. Mookh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondent Commissioner has also not been able to establish that a new commodity commercially known as a distinct and separate commodity having different character, name and use, has come into existence. Therefore, learned Advocate submits that no duty at all is leviable on manufacture of these goods, as alleged by the respondent. 4. As against the aforesaid contentions of the learned Advoca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Heading 85.46 and were excludible from Chapter 39 in view of the Chapter Note 2(n). 5. We have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. The question of excisability is a legal question whether any manufacturing activity has been undertaken or not by the appellant firm; simply because it had not been taken up by the appellants prior to 1-3-1986 when they had been availing the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... firm and consequently, there was no liability of duty inasmuch as the same goods are being manufactured in the present case as were being manufactured in the earlier case i.e. in the case of Steel Authority of India (supra). 7. In view of the foregoing, we need not go into the other pleas taken by the learned Advocate i.e. the demand is barred by time. Appeal disposed of in above manner. - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
