9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is arising out of the same Order-in-originals they are being disposed off by a common order. 2. The relevant facts of the case are the appellant company is a 100% EOU and procure inputs duty free either indigenously or by way of import, for use in relation to the manufacture of camshafts. One of the input procured by the appellant is Resin Coated Sand (RCS). This RCS is used to make moulds/patterns and cores, which are in turn utilized for the manufacture of camshafts. After the completion of the relevant processes, the resin coated sand after use yields burnt sand as remnant. This burnt sand is non-excisable goods and is disposed off by the appellant company. It is the contention of the Revenue that the appellant company having availe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and perused the records. It is undisputed that the appellants are 100% EOU and they procured duty free resin coated sand for the manufacture for final products that are totally exported by the appellants. It is also undisputed that the duty free in puts (RCS) has been accounted by the appellants and that the appellant have continuously achieved the export obligations as set by the DGFT. It is also not disputed that the manufacturing process results in the burning of the resin coated sand, which is of no use to the appellants, and it has to be cleared from the appellant's factory. It is also undisputed that the said burnt sand is a non- excisable item. 5. In order to examine whether the appellants have violated condition at paragraph 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... holders referred to in clause (e) of paragraph 9.10 of the said Export and Import Policy, without payment of duty". It may be noticed from the above-reproduced paragraph 7 of the notification that the embargo put is in respect of the "such articles" which are non-excisable. It would mean that "such articles" are the articles which are be manufactured as final products by the appellant as per the LOP given by the DGFT. In the present case before us, the castings manufactured by the appellant are the "such articles" as envisaged in Notification No. 531.97. If that be the case, we find that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Hanil Era (supra) clearly covers the issue in the present case before us. We may read paragraph 17 from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
