9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (1) TMI 131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of nozzles, nozzles holder and injectors. Vide show-cause notice dated 3-9-1986, the department called upon the appellant to show cause as to why duty @ 20% ad valorem on the value of nozzles and nozzle holders should not be recovered in respect of injectors on the ground that the appellant had produced nozzles and nozzle holders falling under Tariff Item 8409.00 which were captively consumed for the manufacture of injectors falling under 8409.00 for which no declaration was made by the appellant in their classification list. At this stage, we may point out that the matter has a chequered history, it has been remanded several times and for the reasons mentioned hereinafter, it is not necessary to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... njectors were also given the benefit of exemption, which has not been appreciated by the department (See Written Submissions filed by the assessee before the A.C., on running page no. 145 of the paperbook of original record). Similarly, according to the appellant, exemption was also given by the Government to vehicular nozzles and nozzle holders used in a factory of production vide Notification No. 75/86 dated 10-8-1986 (See Written Submissions filed by the assessee before the A.C., on running page no. 142 of the paperbook of original record]. 3. By the impugned judgment, the Tribunal held that the assessee was not entitled to exemption under the above Notification No. 217/85 as "nozzles and nozzle holders" were specifically excluded from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present case, it has been alleged by the department that nozzles and nozzle holders were components of an injector; that, on coupling, which process constituted manufacture, an independent product, namely, an injector emerged. This point was not there in the earlier case, hence, Motor Industries Co. Limited (supra) has no application to the present case. Further, the present case arises under the 1985 Tariff Act. Chapter 84 falls in Section XVI. Section Note 2, with the Headings 84.07, 84.08 and 84.09 are required to be considered. These provisions were not there in the case of Motor Industries Co. Limited (supra). Thirdly, in this case, the burden was on the department to lead evidence on manufacture and marketability, it is for the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
