9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 1046X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the appellant challenging the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Tiruchirappalli denying the benefit of exemption in terms of Notification No. 205 of 1988, dated 25 May, 1988 and the consequential rejection of their claim for classification under Chapter sub-heading 8412.00. Facts in Nutshell : 2. The appellant is a manufacturer of "Wind Mill Towers" and parts of Wind Mill and they are suppliers to M/s. NEPC-MICON, Madras. The appellant filed a classification list before the Central Excise Authorities classifying "Wind Mill Towers" under Chapter sub-heading 8412.00 and claimed benefits of exemption under Notification No. 205/88, dated 25 May, 1988. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy, rejected the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tification No. 205/88, dated 25 May, 1988. The department found that the classification would come under Chapter sub-heading 7308.20 and directed the appellant to file a fresh classification. Accordingly, the appellant filed a classification sub-heading 8412.00 attracting duty at the rate of 10%. 6. The department found that the Towers manufactured by the appellant, even though meant for "Wind Mills" finds a specific place under Chapter sub-heading 7308.20 attracting duty at the rate of 15%. Though a show cause notice was issued to the appellant, as to why classification should not be made under Chapter sub-heading 7308.20, there was no reply from the appellant. There-after personal hearing was given to the appellant and ultimately th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... given exemption. Therefore, the CESTAT concluded that on facts the appellant has no case. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed. 9. The appellant now seeks to raise the factual contentions once again. It is a matter of record that during the relevant period "Towers for Wind Mills" were classifiable under Chapter sub-heading 7308.20. There was a specific heading relating to "Towers for Wind Mills" and as such, Towers manufactured by the appellant for Wind Mills was rightly classified under Chapter sub-heading 7308.20. In fact, on an earlier occasion the very same classification was made in the case of the appellant and it was confirmed in appeal. Therefore, it was only for the remaining period from September, 1994 to January, 1995 the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
