9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CSH. 52.06 of Central Excise Tariff processed and cleared by M/s. Coimbatore Pioneer Mills Ltd., Erode (CPM). He also dropped the proposal to confiscate the seized 196.9 L.M of processed cotton polyester lungie fabrics. The processes undertaken by the respondents declared were washing, stentering, calendaring etc. Scrutiny of the private records of the respondents revealed that they had subjected the impugned fabrics to chemical padding and special finishing. The exemption contained in Notification No. 253/82 dated 8-11-82, was not available to goods which were subjected to processes other than those specified in the notification. The processes such as padding with chemicals and special finishing processes were not specified in the not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner had erred in finding that the respondents had not undertaken mercerizing without positive evidence. The Commissioner had dropped the proposal to penalize the respondents under Section I1AC and under Rule 173Q without justification. The appellant prayed for modifying the impugned order which dropped the demand of duty of Rs. 52,97,980.56 on processed cotton polyester fabrics and did not impose penalties under Section 11AC and Rule 173Q. 4. None appeared for the respondents. The ld. SDR reiterates the grounds taken in the appeal. 5. We have carefully considered the case records and the submissions. The allegation against CPM is that they engaged in padding of cotton polyester lungi fabrics with chemicals and also special finishing proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ftening and other chemicals. Servolin was natural starch purchased from M/s. Laxmi Starch Ltd. In CBEC Circular No. 16/CE/89-CXI, dated 24-10-89, it was clarified that padding with Taffinol Anu alone, without starch would not be eligible for exemption under Notification No. 152/82. 5.2 In the review order of the Board, it is averred that the processes mentioned in the Notification No. 153/82 did not impart a lasting characteristic. The effects wore off in case of all processes. Thus the Revenue does not contest the finding that the process of padding with starch solution does not impart a permanent character to the cotton polyester lungi fabric. Alleged special processes also are found to render the fabrics sheen and softness. These also d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acture. Therefore subjecting cotton polyester dyed lungi fabrics to padding and the special processes, we find, do not constitute manufacture. We concur with the Commissioner in his finding that the allegations and proposals against CPM were not well founded. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Original No. 15/99, dated 9-12-99. 6. Notification No. 153/82-CX exempted cotton fabrics, falling under Chapter 52 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 when subjected to any process or processes specified in the table annexed, from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon. However no such exemption shall apply if such cotton fabrics arc subjected to any process or processes specified ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
