9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant have 56 per cent cotton and 44 per cent of several other materials such as Acrylic, Polyester, wool, nylon, viscose as was found after test by CRCL. It has already been held by this Tribunal in MARK SPLENDOUR NONWOVENS P. LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF C. EX., JAIPUR ALWAR [ 2017 (10) TMI 1432 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] that the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of this exemption for the same products. Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- These are irrelevant because no extended period of limitation has been invoked in either of these two appeals. As far as the appellant s submission regarding classification of textile materials by the predominant material by weight is concerned, we find that the dispute is not regarding the cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30.07.2015 Has extended period of limitation been invoked? NO NO OIO 25.02.2016 28.02.2017 OIA 31.05.2018 04.05.2018 2. We have heard Shri Anjani Kumar Singh, in person for the appellant and Shri Rakesh Agarwal, authorised representative appearing for the Department and perused the records. 3. The issue which falls for consideration in these two appeals is whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of the exemption Notification No. 29/2004-CE as amended by Notification No. 07/2012-CE for nonwoven felt fabrics falling under Central Excise Tariff Heading 5602 manufactured by it or not. According to the appellant, it is entitled to the benefit of the exemption notification while according to the Revenue it is not. 4. After he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notification extends the concessional rate of duty only for goods of Chapter 56 if the goods are made of cotton not containing any other textile material. The test result has clearly shown that the finished goods manufactured by the appellant contain significant amount of fibres other than cotton also. Consequently the benefit of exemption will not be available to the appellant. 8. The case law cited by the appellant has dealt with the classification of the goods containing more than one textile material. Same is not applicable to the present case which deals with only the benefit of exemption notification. 9. In view of the above, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned orders. In the result, all the appeals are dismissed." ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Notification No. 29/2004 is available for goods falling under Chapter 56 made of cotton and not to any other textile material. Undisputedly, the products of the appellant have 56 per cent cotton and 44 per cent of several other materials such as Acrylic, Polyester, wool, nylon, viscose as was found after test by CRCL. It has already been held by this Tribunal that the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of this exemption for the same products. 8. Insofar as the appellant's submissions regarding extended period of limitation are concerned, these are irrelevant because no extended period of limitation has been invoked in either of these two appeals. As far as the appellant's submission regarding classification of textile materials by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
