9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (9) TMI 353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. Shri R. Sudhinder, learned Counsel arguing the stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 83,842/- submits that duty has been demanded on coal ash. He submits that coal ash has been held to be non-excisable. In support of this contention he refers to the judgment contained in Final Order No. 121/89-B, dated 21-4-1989 in the case of Sw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... excisable as other ash falling under Heading 26.21 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Learned Counsel, therefore, submits that this decision of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court was followed by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Century Rayon v. Union of India reported in 2002 (142) E.L.T. 319 wherein it was held that cinder obtained by way of waste product during the generation of ste ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ming to the conclusion that coal ash (cinder) was not excisable. He, therefore, prayed that no credence can be given to this circular when there are High Court orders. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. We have also perused the case law cited and relied upon by the learned Counsel for the applicant. We note that the applicant has been able to make out a prima ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
