9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (12) TMI 307X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er (T)]. In this appeal filed by revenue, the issue involved is whether the benefit of Notification No. 46/81-CE, dated 1-3-1981 is available to the Respondents M/s Jyoti Refinery. 2. We heard Shri Satnam Singh, learned S.D.R. and Shri Prakash Shah, the learned Advocate. Briefly stated the facts are that M/s Jyoti Refinery were manufacturing chemicals based on precious metals and refining ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Respondents since they were employing more than 9 workers; that, however, the demand was restricted to the period of six months only as according to Collector extended period of limitation was not invokable. The Collector further extended the benefit of other Notification such as 131/81 in respect of platenium, 234/82 in respect of silver, Notification No. 131/82 for conversion of old articles o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents, submitted that the respondents had also preferred an appeal against the impugned order for confirmation of demand for preceding six months period and being considered as a factory under Section 2(m) of the Factories Act; that the Appellate Tribunal, vide Final Order No. 480/WZB/ 1998/CI dated 4-2-1998 [1999 (112) E.L.T. 571 (Tribunal)] has set a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Act certifying that the Appellant unit as well as the other 2 units concerned do not fall within the definition of factory under the Act. It is well settled that the Central Excise authorities are not expected to go behind the certificate issued on other enactments by the competent authority empowered thereunder. 6. e also observe from the perusal of the said order that Tribunal also ga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
