9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 917X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peals) dated 28 August 2001 which arose from the order in original No. CEX/GD/254/2000 dated 16 August, 2000. 2. The question of law so framed arises for consideration in the following facts: The Appellants are engaged in processing of fabrics on job work basis. Till 16 December 1998, the said processed fabrics were chargeable to duty at ad-valorem rates of 12% Basic Excise Duty. The Appellants are having its factory and office at Goregaon (East), Mumbai. The Appellants are engaged in the processing of cotton fabrics and man made fabrics falling under Chapter 52, 54, 55, 58 & 60 respectively of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 ("CETA") and were holding valid C.Ex. Registration Certificate. The Appellants' stock of manufactured fabrics and s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 1999 calling upon the Appellants to pay the amount of Rs. 4,95,593 (in total). The Assistant Commissioner adjudicated the show cause notice and confirmed the demand. The Appellants thereafter filed an Appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Mumbai. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that it was an admitted position that the fabrics were semi finished and by order dated 28 August 2001, allowed the Appeal filed by the Appellants. The Commissioner (Appeals) also referred to a decision taken by him in the case of M/s. Vishnu Dyeing and Printing Works V/s. Commissioner of Central Excise 2006 (198) ELT.478 (Tri.-Mumbai). 4. Challenging the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Department filed an Appeal in the Custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) is the decision rendered in the case of M/s. Vishnu Dyeing and Printing Works which was the subject matter of Central Excise Appeal No. 104 of 2007 filed in this Court. The Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 16 July 2008, had allowed the Appeal and by setting aside the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal remanded the same for reconsideration. The learned counsel submitted that upon remand, the Appellate Tribunal has rendered the decision in favour of Assessee therein. The learned counsel submits that the similar course of action needs to be adopted in the present case. 8. In view of this development, the questions of law are re-framed as under; 1. Whether the Judgment and order passed by the Appellate Tribunal need ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Works. Therefore, we are unable to accept the contentions of the learned counsel for the Respondent that the discussion of the Tribunal should be severed to uphold certain findings. Since the manner in which one of the main findings sought to be scrutinized is reversed, we have to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the Appellants that the matter needs reconsideration by the Appellate Tribunal. 11. In the light of the above, we have to remand the Appeal No. E/ 2985/01 & E/CO-277/02-Mum filed by the department for reconsideration and decision in accordance with law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Central excise Appeal No. 104 of 2007 decided on 16 July 2008 and the observations made in this order. 12. We ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
