9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (3) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibre from Japan. They imported certain quantity of this product between 9th May, 1978 and 17th January, 1981. The petitioners were forced by the Customs authorities to pay countervailing duty on the said product to the extent of Rs. 1,76,421.62, details of which are given in Exhibit 'C' annexed to this petition. The petitioners contended that by notification dated 16th March, 1976 the manufacture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whole of excise duty leviable thereon. In fact the petitioners were cautious enough to make an enquiry with the office of the Assistant Collector of Customs. The Enquiry Officer of the said office, by his letter dated 3rd October, 1977, informed the petitioners that there was no countervailing duty payable on the import of fibre glass filament yarns. It has been mentioned by Mr. Thakkar that after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mentioned above. The Government held in its order disposing of the said revision application that the impugned glass yarn being wholly made of glass filaments was covered by the exemption under the notification in question. In view of this position the Government allowed the revision application with a direction that the impugned glass yarn would be exempted from the countervailing duty in terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that office must set its affairs in order and enable Courts to go on with the hearing of the petitions. I must make it clear at this stage that in these petitions which are almost ancient, no adjournments will ever be granted on the mere ground that affidavits in reply have not been filed. If no reply could be filed for years together, I do not see how they can be filed within a short time. 6. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
