9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pipes and couplings. Under the exemption Notification No. 38/93-CE, dated 28-2-1993, goods falling under Chapter No. 68 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, in which not less than 25% by weight of fly ash was exempted from the whole of the duties of excise leviable therein. The exemption was subjected to maintenance of proper accounts as stipulated in the proviso to the said notification. As per the production record i.e. log book maintained by the production department, the assessee had issued a total number of 878 batches of raw material mix, comprising of cement, fly ash and asbestos during the period 26-1-95 to 31-8-95. Out of these, 814 batches had contained 1000 Kgs. of raw material and the remaining 64 batches had contai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of M/s Eternit Everest Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2002 (150) E.L.T. 1151 (Tri.) = 1999 (34) RLT 417. The Commissioner expressed the view that everyday's production entry in the log book truly reflects the dry weight of pipes and couplings as well as the quantity of various raw materials used in the manufacture of the said items. Thus, in the opinion of the Commissioner, the log book sheet provides the percentage of fly ash used in the manufacture of pipes and couplings. The Commissioner noted that in the log book, the dry weight of pipes and couplings are also mentioned. The Commissioner also took into account the exclusion of wastage of 3%. It was, thus, held that the assessee had used 232.555 MT of fly ash and produced 985.38 MT of finished ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the percentage of fly ash is to be found out therefrom. Thus, the Tribunal expressed the view that the stand taken in the show cause notice that water content was also to be taken into consideration for arriving at 25% of fly ash content which went into production of asbestos cement pipes cannot be sustained. In view of the finding, the CEGAT set aside the order of the Commissioner. 3.We have heard Mr. V.K. Mathur, learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel and Mr. Manish Shishodia for the respondent assessee. In our view, the Tribunal has viewed the issue involved from an erroneous angle. The main question involved is that as to whether the stand taken by the Department in the show cause notice viz., in finding out the perce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
