PVC compound duty demand failed where clearance evidence was lacking and exemption relief under Notification 83/94-CE applied.

A duty demand on PVC compound was rejected because it rested on presumption and inference, not categorical evidence that Unit No. 2's production was cleared to Unit No. 1. The factual finding that footwear manufacture at Unit No. 2 could not be ruled out remained intact, so the Revenue failed to dislodge the conclusions in the impugned order. The exemption plea under Notification No. 83/94-CE dated 11/04/1994 was also found to have force on the facts, and the demand was held not sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the duty demand on PVC compound manufactured by one unit and allegedly cleared to the other unit was sustainable, and whether the assessee was entitled to relief under Notification No. 83/94-CE dated 11/04/1994.

Analysis: The demand was found to rest on presumption and inference rather than on categorical evidence showing that the PVC compound manufactured by Unit No. 2 was cleared to Unit No. 1. The finding that footwear manufacture at Unit No. 2 could not be ruled out remained unshaken, and the Revenue's appeal did not effectively dislodge the factual conclusions recorded in the impugned order. The plea based on Notification No. 83/94-CE dated 11/04/1994 was also found to have force on the facts.

Conclusion: The duty demand was not sustainable and the Revenue's appeals were liable to be rejected.

---