9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (6) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification No. 275/88-C.E., dated 4-11-1998. 2. Shri Kamal Trivedi alongwith Shri Uday Joshi and Jitendra Singh, learned Advocates, submitted that the Appellants manufacture unmachined castings and cast articles; that the impugned goods is called PT-81 which is an unmachined cast article of iron; that the Collector, Central Excise, under the impugned Order No. 14/Collector/1994 confirmed the demand of duty, imposed penalty and confiscated the impugned goods with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine, holding that the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 275/88 was not available as PT-81 was capable of being used as such without doing any machining, etc. and it was completely recognizable as part of dobby head and was c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by these persons in common proceedings involving various units of the Group involving many commodities; that this is evident from their statements dated 24-7-1992 and 11-1-1993. The learned Advocate also contended that PT-81 was eligible for exemption from payment of duty under Notification No. 275/86-C.E. as certain processes were to be carried out such as surface cleaning, grinding, removing runners and risers, assembling on shaft and subjecting the same to balancing process; that the impugned goods was nothing but unmachined cast article of iron and as per the decision in Shivaji Works Ltd. v. C.C.E., 1994 (69) E.L.T. 674, it is classifiable under Heading 7325.10 of CETA; that the Board under Circular No. 1/87, dated 18-2-1987 clarified ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 24-9-1992 that "LMS" mark is owned by the Marketing Company and there is a mutual agreement regarding its use and oral consent for use of the brand name had been obtained". The learned DR also emphasized that Shri Doshi has also deposed that PT-81 is capable of being used as such without doing any machining, etc. that Shri S.L. Shah also stated in his statement that PT-81 can be used in the dobby machine as it is in condition without any further process; that from these statements, there does not remain any doubt about the impugned product being a machine part falling under Chapter 84 of the Central Excise Tariff; that the process mentioned in Board's Circular and the detention Memo are of negligible nature and do not change the basic char ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... controverted by submitting that the statements were recorded in general terms in respect of various goods manufactured by them and not with specific reference to the impugned goods PT-81. We find force in this submission as Shri S.L. Shah, in his statement, was referring to "Patterns" with "LMS" marks and "identification" of their products in the market. It cannot be inferred from this that PT-81, impugned goods, was also embossed with "LMS" particularly when it is only a part of dobby head. Further Shri H.L. Bhatt, Range Superintendent, in his cross-examination has stated as under :- Q. No. 10 Am I correct to state the said detention memo dated 24th Sept., 1992 and seizure memo dated 4th Nov., 1992 in case of LMS Foundaries Pvt. Ltd. ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
