9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leaching, dyeing and painting and not with respect to usage of power in carrying out any of the processes mentioned in paragraph No.2 of the Notification. Likewise, under Notification No.9/96 which was a subsequent notification, there were 12 processes which were specified and the disability is mentioned in Condition No.1 which is only in respect of the manufacture of denim fabrics. In relation to the respondents, it is nobody's case that they are manufacturers of denim fabrics or other fabrics mentioned in the prohibited category. Order of the Commissioner itself records that the respondents by letter dated 23.03.1998 had explained in detail the process of manufacturing since 1992 and periodical checks were being done by the Department ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The respondent was issued a Show Cause Notice dated 22.12.1999 demanding a duty amount of Rs.2,39,151/- under Rule 9(2) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 (for brevity the Rules ) read with Section 11A of the Act, and to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed under Rule 9(2) and Rule 173Q of the Rules, and why interest at 20% p.a. should not be demanded. The respondent submitted his detailed explanation dated 06.12.2000 and raised the following objections: i) The show cause notices were hit by limitation of time and invocation of proviso (1) to Section 11A was not justifiable. ii) In their declaration dt.23.04.1998 filed for the year 1998-99 in terms of Notification No.13/92-CE(NT) as amended, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entations made by them to the Ministry under Section 11C of Central Excise Act. They have contended that the correct explanation/interpretation should be de facto made applicable to all present cases pending adjudication, keeping in view the right spirit of law. x) No separate penalty is applicable to Sri S.Venkata Ramana, Proprietor, under Rule 209A as there is no split personality of the Managing Partner in individual capacity. After considering the objections filed by the respondent-assessee and affording personal hearing, the Commissioner recorded that as a matter of fact the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the exemption notification under Serial No.13 of Notification No.9/96-CE, dated 23.07.1996 as amended and also exempt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication No. 9/96 is not available. In addition to the above common grounds with respect to the respondent in C.E.A.No. 49 of 2005, a specific further ground was raised that A.E.D. and B.E.D. was leviable for the period from 01.08.1995 to 04.08.1999 under Notification Nos.41/95 and 8/96. With respect to the respondent in C.E.A.No.51 of 2005, A.E.D. is leviable under Notification No. 41/95 and B.E.D. under Notification No.9/96 for the period between 01.08.1995 to 04.08.1999 and 23.07.1996 to 04.08.1999. v) The respondents were engaged in the business of manufacturing process of cotton fabrics since 1991-92 and it is only during survey in March, 1998 the Unions were found to be using power, as such, there was suppression with regard to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s is very much a manual process. By following earlier CEGAT decision in Final Order No. 733 of 1997, dated 01.03.1997, the process of silicate padding for fixation of ramzol dyes was held to be the process of curing which does not disentitle the exemption in terms of Notification No.40/1995. The Tribunal merely followed the Final Order No.733 of 1997. The use of power either diesel power or electric power was not disputed by the respondents, but the contention of the respondents is to the effect that the restriction placed with respect to use of the power is only in relation to carrying activities of bleaching, dyeing or printing or anyone or more of the processes and not in relation to the operations of stentering, starching on a padding m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of water from the bore-well, small motors being fixed with sterner of the dies, etc. which is not prohibited. A comprehensive analysis and understanding of the notification by which the exceptions carved out to deny the exemption where power is used, would leave no manner of doubt that usage of power is restricted only in an integrated manufacturing process by specifying the specific processes. In that view of the matter, the order of the Tribunal, based on the findings of the Commissioner, which are not challenged before us, does not call for interference on merits. Further, the order of the Commissioner itself records that the respondents by letter dated 23.03.1998 had explained in detail the process of manufacturing since 1992 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
