9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 427X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted rate of Entry No. 20(1)C of Notification 27/95-C.E., dated 16-3-95 plus 15% of B10 per kg. and concession at 6.05% goods were released. 2. Subsequently it was noticed that exemption under Notfn. 27/95-C.E., dated 16-3-95 was not eligible as Entry No. 20(1)(c) had been deleted vide Notification 95/95-C.E., dated 26-5-95. The imports made in this case were vide BE dated 18-8-95 to 24-1-96. A notice was therefore issued dated 23-3-96 demanding an amount of Additional Duty of Customs at rate of 15% of 50% by denying the benefit of Notification 27/95-C.E., dated 16-3-95 benefit rate. The lower authority confirmed the demand on all BEs, except on BE No. 6718, dated 18-8-95 remanding that particular BE facts to be verified examining the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 wherein a factory under Sec. 2(e) means any premises wherein excisable goods are manufactured and the goods manufactured abroad are not excisable under the Central Excises Salt Act. Therefore, the ratio of the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ashok Traders v. UOI, 1987 (32) E.L.T. 262 (Bombay) which was relied upon by the Assistant Commissioner would be squarely applicable to the instant case and the advantage of the Notification will not be available to the applicants. Further the ratio of the decision of the Hon ble Tribunal in 1987 (29) E.L.T. 278 (T) which held to the effect that the imported goods would not be entitled to the benefit of conditional Notification conti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18-5-95, on examination it is found (i) The condition in the said Notification introduced by the proviso clause reads as Provided that the exemption contained in this notification shall not apply to a factory producing man-made staple fibres or man-made filament yarn of organic polymers by manufacturing processes, either by - (a) Polymerization of organic polymers (b) Chemical transformation of natural organic polymers irrespective of whether such factory produces such man-made filaments only or also manufacture any other goods (ii) The reliance of the lower authority on the case of Ashok Traders v. U.O.I., 1987 (32) E.L.T. 262 is not applicable in the facts of this case. The exemption is not availab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... handigarh Zinc Pvt. Ltd. [1995 (78) E.L.T. 102] holding that benefit of an exemptions notification would be applicable would be relevant in this case. The department wants to deny the benefit of Notification 85/95, dated 18-5-95 by placing onus on the importer to prove that he is not excluded by the proviso clause, that cannot be upheld. The department should prove that the factory when goods under import originate are excluded by the proviso clause from the benefit of the notification. (c) Since the matter stands partially remitted to the original authority to consider time-bar issue in case of one BE, this appeal is also required to be remitted to reconsider the eligibility of the alternate notification. (d) The lower a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
