9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (7) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the public. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants herein manufacture inter alia polyester filament yarn and polyester staple fibre falling under Chapters 54 and 55 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985. On 26-3-1990, Notification 57/90 was issued whereby polyester filament yarn was chargeable to duty @ Rs. 55 per kg. and polyester staple fibre (manufactured out of duty paid DMT of PTA) was chargeable to duty @ Rs. 8.50 paise per kg. During the period from 15-12-1990 to 17-12-1990, the appellants cleared PSF and PFY on payment of duty as prescribed in the above mentioned Notification. On 17-12-1990 at about 5.30 PM, the Assistant Collector visited the factory of the appellants and delivered to them a photocopy of the telex da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 991 for public sale, and hence it is to be held that Notification 161/90 was not operative during the period in dispute i.e. the period between 15-12-1990 and 17-12-1990 and, therefore, the duty demand raised against the appellants and confirmed against them cannot be sustained. The appellants clarify that it is sufficient for the purpose of this appeal if such a view is taken, and they are not seeking refund of the duty paid at the enhanced rate right from 18-12-1990 itself. The appellants rely upon the latest decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the cases of Collector of Central Excise v. New Tobacco Company reported in 1998 (97) E.L.T. 388 (S.C.) and Garware Nylons Ltd. v. CCE, Pune reported in 1998 (100) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) in suppor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case and it has only been stated therein that these two judgments noted above are not helpful in deciding the question that arises in the case before the Supreme Court (in the New Tobacco case). He, therefore, urges us to follow the decision of Pankaj Jain Agencies and the ITC case to hold that the demand is justified. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. The Assistant Collector has emphasised that there was wide publicity in the form of printing in newspapers, announcement on TV/Radio about Notification 161/90 enhancing the rate of duty on PFY and PSF. It has been held by the Supreme Court in the Pankaj Jain Agencies case and ITC case cited supra that communication is relevant for the purpose of determining when ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
