Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the respondents were entitled to the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 65/87 dated 1-3-1987 for the processed shawls cleared by them.
Analysis: The material on record did not show that the shawls processed by the respondents required any further stitching, hemming or whipping before clearance. The findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) were that the goods were processed as double-width shawls, divided by a fringe, and could be obtained as two shawls of equal width without further processing. The Revenue failed to establish that the goods were not in a ready-to-use condition or that additional processing was necessary to make them marketable. The burden to justify denial of the exemption lay on the Revenue, and that burden was not discharged.
Conclusion: The respondents were entitled to the exemption under Notification No. 65/87 dated 1-3-1987, and the Revenue's appeal failed.