9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (8) TMI 273X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the appellants had used the input material as set out in the notification and the same was clearly recognisable as non-duty paid and has, therefore, denied the benefit of the exemption notification. 2. The learned Advocate for the appellants while conceding that in a similar case the Tribunal has taken a view that in a case like that of the appellants, the benefit of notification has been held to be not available. He has pleaded that he has some fresh pleas to make in this regard. Narrating the facts of the case, he has pleaded that the appellants are manufacturers of moulds and the buyers of the moulds after they have used the same over a period of time and when the moulds have become unusable, they send the same back to the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. He has pleaded that the appellants having not been able to establish that the unusable moulds which were in the nature of scrap had suffered Central Excise duty and, therefore, the mischief of the proviso to the notification would be attracted. He has also pleaded that in case the duty has not been demanded on the unusable moulds which were in the nature of the scrap, that would not by itself change the character of the unusable mould as being non-duty paid item. He has pleaded that the moment the item could not be used as a mould, it lost its character as such and became only a scrap. It was only out of this scrap, he pleaded that a new mould came to be manufactured. The scrap in question did not suffer any duty and, therefore, the ques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purpose of which the notification is issued is that once the inputs has suffered duty under a Tariff Items under which the final product which is manufactured out of the same also falls, there should not be two point levy. And to ensure that the proviso has been added that once the inputs are clearly recognisable as non-duty paid, the benefit of notification would not be available. We have taken similar view in another case of Shri Ram Refrigerators. 5. In view of the above discussion, we find no force in the plea of the appellants and, therefore, the appeals are dismissed. 6. The cross appeal filed is in the nature of comments and the same is, therefore, not maintainable as a cross appeal in law and the same is, therefore, dismissed a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
