9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (11) TMI 491X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant approached the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and the High Court was pleased to pass the following directions :- "3. The main point in support of the writ application seems to be non-consideration of the relevant aspects by the Tribunal while considering the stay application. It is to be noted that while dealing with stay application the Tribunal is not required to give a definite finding on merits and has to give only a prima facie opinion. The Tribunal is only required to decide that a prima facie case existed, along with other considerations like balance of convenience, etc., for dispensing with pre-deposit. As learned Counsel for the petitioner has referred to certain documents more particularly the classification list as app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Classification List on 7-3-1991 effective from 20-3-1990 (pages 32-33). In this Classification List the goods were mentioned as "scrap of wire bar moulds" (Sl. No. 11.3). In the remarks column it had been explained "scrap is sold in these cases". The appellant had also claimed benefit of Notification No. 67/89 dated 1-3-1989. With particular reference to demand for over Rs. 17 Lakhs which is the subject-matter of Appeal E/2183/98-B and Stay Application E/S/1959/98-B, the learned Counsel submitted that the demand is on account of re-classification of the goods cleared under Tariff Item 7419.91, while duty had been paid under 7404. The learned Counsel submitted that, it is evident from the Classification lists that the appellants had not s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefit of Notification No. 171/84 and they had specifically stated that the moulds are to be melted after use. In the remarks column it was also stated that "scrap arising from these items are melted within the factory". The learned D.R. submitted that it is clear from these declarations of the appellants that they were fully aware of their obligations to captively use the exempted moulds and to melt them once they became scrap. It is undisputed in the facts of the case that the moulds in question were not melted within the factory but were cleared as scrap. While clearing the moulds as scrap, no mention was made of the fact that the appellant had availed themselves of total exemption from duty under Notification No. 171/84 when the moulds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It is clear that the appellant had not paid duty on the moulds at the time of captively consuming them. This is permissible only in terms of Notification No. 171/84. In their classification list dated 20-3-1990 against Sl. No. l4 the appellant had clearly stated that the moulds were to be melted after use. In the remarks column also they had specifically stated their obligation by stating that "scrap arising from these items are melted within the factory". The appellants' conduct of clearing the used moulds after paying duty on them as scrap was clearly contrary to the statement made in the classification list and the obligation under the notification. The duty demand was, therefore, fully justified. In the face the appellant availing him ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
