1987 (4) TMI 320 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal upholds denial of refund claims for non-controlled drill fabrics post-amendment

The Tribunal dismissed all three appeals, upholding the rejection of refund claims for non-controlled drill post-amendment and printed drill ... Controlled drill - Exemption Issues: Determination of entitlement to concessional rate of duty on cotton fabrics under Central Excise Notification No. 226/77, dated 15.7.77 as amended by notification No. 301/79, dated 30.11.1979 for drill fabrics not conforming to the description of controlled drill, and printed drill fabrics before and after 30.11.1979.Analysis:1. Entitlement to Concessional Rate of Duty Post-Amendment (Appeals 2171 & 2172):- Central Excise Notification No. 226/77 provided a concessional rate for fabrics conforming to the description of controlled drill. Amendment by notification No. 301/79 on 30-11-1979 restricted the benefit to controlled drill only.- The Collector (Appeals) held that the appellants' drill did not meet the description of controlled drill post-amendment, thus upholding the rejection of refund claims for the relevant periods.- Referring to previous cases, the Tribunal affirmed that the amendment limited the scope to controlled drill, leading to the dismissal of appeals 2171 & 2172.2. Entitlement to Concessional Rate for Printed Drill (Appeal 2170):- The definition of drill by the Textile Commissioner excluded printed drill from the concessional rate even before 30.11.1979.- The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the refund claim for printed drill fabric, as it did not meet the definition criteria.- Considering the definition of drill as grey, bleached, or piece-dyed cloth, the Tribunal concluded that printed drill did not qualify for the concessional rate.3. Precedents and Tribunal Decisions:- Previous cases like Collector of Central Excise v. Jiyaji Rao Cotton Mills Ltd. and Collector of Central Excise v. Jiyajee Rao Cotton Mills Ltd. provided insights on similar issues.- The Tribunal's consistent interpretation post-amendment of 30.11.1979 restricted the benefit to controlled drill, aligning with the Textile Commissioner's definitions.4. Final Decision:- The Tribunal dismissed all three appeals, affirming the rejection of refund claims for non-controlled drill post-amendment and printed drill pre-amendment based on the Textile Commissioner's definitions and the scope of the amendments to the Central Excise Notification.This detailed analysis highlights the key legal points and interpretations made by the Tribunal regarding the entitlement to concessional rates for cotton fabrics, specifically drill fabrics, under the Central Excise Notifications pre and post-amendment.