2010 (12) TMI 319

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppellant is an independent textile processor engaged in processing of man-made fabrics falling under Chapter Heading 5406.00 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the relevant period, the appellant was working under Compounded Levy Scheme in terms of provisions of Section 3A of Central Excise Act, 1944.   2. The dispute in the present appeal relates to abatement claim amounting to Rs.3, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... im for abatement from 16.2.01 to 28.2.01 may be sanctioned inasmuch as the withdrawal of the scheme was not in the hands of the appellant. Inasmuch as the circumstances were beyond their control, the right to claim abatement having been earned by them, cannot be defeated by the subsequent withdrawal of the scheme. 4. After hearing both sides, we find that an identical issue stands decided by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... withdrawal of Compounded Levy Scheme cannot affect their right. By relying upon the Larger Bench judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. CCE Kanpur 2001 (131) ELT 370, the abatement claimed was allowed.   6. As the facts of the above decision are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case, by following the ratio of the same, we set aside the impu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X