1997 (8) TMI 302

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der per : Justice U.L. Bhat, President]. Appellant, engaged in the manufacture of HDPE woven sacks, was using HDPE granules, converting the same into Tapes, weaving the Tapes into Fabrics, cutting, stiching the Fabrics into Sacks and painting the same. Appellant was not using electric power for the conversion of granules into Tapes or for conversion of Fabrics into Woven Sacks, but was using .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r had been used, the benefit of Notification No. 65/87 was not available. 2. Appellant resisted the notice contending that the department had clarified that the benefit of the Notification would not be available only if power is used in converting Fabrics into Woven Sacks and that the use of the power at the earlier Stages would not amount to using power in the manufacture of Woven Sacks. 3. T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cks and use of power at any prior stage would not render the Notification inapplicable. If a manufacturer has acted on the strength of such a stand taken by the department, he cannot be considered to be guilty of suppression of material facts in the classification list or intent to evade duty. The notice was issued more than 6 months after the period covered by the demand and since the proviso to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X