2005 (10) TMI 145

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tions, a common question of law and facts are involved, hence they have been taken up together for disposal as per law. In the case of Mallika Saree Processing, the duty demand is Rs. 17,79,491/- and penalty of Rs. 20,000/-. In the case of Prakash Saree Processing, the duty amount is Rs. 32,72,013/-. The issue for consideration is as to whether the process of decatising, which is known as blowing, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Even otherwise, the learned Counsel submits that the process is a simple process of steam pressing of the sarees to remove the wrinkles and creasing without use of power. Therefore, the Notification benefit cannot be denied. The learned Counsel submits that even in terms of the Notification, the levy of the duty has to be confirmed on the owners of the sarees and not on the processors, as per Rule .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the later Notification would have retrospective effect. They have also taken the defence pertaining to the appellants being not liable to pay the duty and in terms of the Notification the liability has to be fixed on the owners of the sarees. The submission that the owners had not been issued with a show cause notice has also got a force. The issue pertaining to limitation is also a good ground .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X