9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12-98. 2. The appellants are engaged in the processing of man made fabrics. They filed a declaration under letter dated 3-4-2000 in terms of the Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 2000 (hereinafter referred to the Rules) giving therein the details of the Stenter installed in their factory. They have installed one Stenter with three chambers. When the number of chambers were increased from three to four w.e.f. 1-8-2000 the departmental authorities were informed about the addition made. Consequent to the visit of the Departmental Officers, annual capacity was provisionally finalised for the period February, 2000 and March, 2000 vide orders dated 26-2-2001 and 31-7-2001. The provisional capaci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ended on behalf of the appellant that additional facility made inside the stenter as detailed above would not amount to installation of float drying machine. It is submitted that, even if, during the above process some drying of grey fabric would take effect, it will be reflected in the enhanced quantity of processed fabrics produced or manufactured in the unit, which is also a factor for fixing the annual capacity of production. Ld. Counsel for the appellant pointed out that, so long as, no provision is made in the rules for multiplying the number of chambers on the basis of increased number of chains in the stenter, there is no reason whatsoever to do so on the basis of arrangement made by the assessee for moving the fabric below single s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a stenter for aiding the process of heat setting or drying of the fabrics shall be deemed to be one chamber of a stenter and any fraction of such length shall be computed on a pro rata basis. 6. Revenue has relied on the above explanation to add to the number of chambers declared by the assessee on the basis of the addition made inside the stenter by the appellant. We find that Explanation I has no application in the facts of the case. Under Rules it is not impermissible to provide more stenter chains one above the other within the length of each chamber in order to achieve multiple passes. If there are more than one stenter chain in the chamber and due to that reason there would be additional movement of the fabric resulting in more dry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
