Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1998 (1) TMI 235

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ynthetic fibres/natural fibres/yarn. The classification was under sub-heading 5702.20 read with the benefit of Notification No. 50/91 which provided partial exemption to products made of jute falling under Chapters 53, 56 and 57 or 63. At a later date, the jurisdictional officers drew representative samples of the goods, examined the sales literature of the assessee, scrutinised the gate passes and other statutory documents and issued show cause notice dated 16-7-1993 alleging that the goods were classifiable under 5701.11 attracting a higher rate of duty. It was alleged that due to deliberate suppression of certain facts, duty had been evaded, and the extended period was invoked. Allegations were made that the assessees were liable to pena .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the grounds of appeal. 6. In the grounds of appeal, the claim is made that it was not possible to produce a woven carpet without a base fabric or a ground fabric. We do not find any substance in this claim as we have before us two samples one in which a pile is bonded with a base fabric and the other in which the carpet is a result of weaving. The second ground in the appeal memorandum attacks the statement made by one Dr. P.K. Hari, Professor and Head of the Textile Technology Department, IIT, New Delhi who was introduced in the proceedings before the Collector by the assessees. In his deposition, the Professor had categorically mentioned that there was no separate base fabric in the carpet. In the appeal memorandum a citation is made .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... order has taken cognisance of the Note 2 to Section XI which specifies that without considering classification of any textile material which contains more than one textile material, the predominance by weight of one material over the others would be the guiding criteria for classification under Chapters 50-55 or under Heading 5806 or 5902. He has also considered note 14 in which reliance is placed on note 2 but an exception has been made and that is where the product consists of a base fabric and the pile for determining pre-dominance, the base fabric shall not be taken into account. In view of the opinion expressed by Dr. Hari and in view of the findings of the Collector that in the goods manufactured by the assessees, there was not base f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... under all the chapter headings enumerated therein and would benefit the contested goods even if they were to merit classification under sub-heading 5701.11 as claimed by the department. This is because all the three test reports showed the jute content to be over 35% which was the condition imposed by the notification. Therefore even if the grounds advanced by the Revenue had any merit, the demand would still not sustain. 11. We now come to the last point and that is the paucity of the quantum of penalty. We find that the Collector in his discussions had come to the conclusion that the offence on this account was not deliberate. This conclusion was in his mind when he had prescribed the quantum of penalty. In the appeal memorandum, it has .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cation No. 91/94 was more specific, the rate prescribed therein would apply to the products manufactured by the assessees. The assessees filed an appeal against this order. The Collector (Appeals) set aside the order of the Collector and held that the benefit of Notification No. 50/90 as amended was available. He also made orders for refund of the duty paid under protest subject to the satisfaction of the Asstt. Collector. The appeal from the Revenue is against this order. 14. In the grounds of appeal as argued by the ld. JCDR and the ld. JDR, it has been claimed that the Collector (Appeals) in this order has followed the logic of the jurisdictional Collector in his order dated 23-6-1994 which was under challenge before the CEGAT. We have .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates