9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (4) TMI 79X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l unit. The question arises in the following manner. A Notification No. 89/79-C.E., dated 1-3-1979 was issued by the Central Government, Department of Revenue and Banking, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Notification stated that in respect of certain goods falling under Tariff Item 68 of the First Schedule of the Central Excise A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise is satisfied that the sum total of the value of the capital investment from time to time on plant and machinery installed in the industrial unit in which the said goods, under clearance, are manufactured, is not more than rupees ten lakhs". 2.There is no dispute about clauses (a) and (b). The dispute relates to the Proviso. The Proviso says that the Central Excise Officer has to be satisf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... different goods separately and to issue licence separately under Rule 174 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for the different parts of a factory. All such sections or parts of a factory are known as industrial units holding individual L-4 licences. 3.The factual position has not been controverted. If that be so, in the Notification, the expression "industrial unit" must have been used in the sens ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1984 (16) E.L.T 30 (Bom.)], where a similar view has been taken. The learned Addl. Solicitor General has contended that these cases were decided under different Notifications. The contention of the assessee is that this view of the Bombay High Court has been consistently followed by the Tribunal in many other notifications also. 6.We need not express any view on any other notification. 7.We are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
