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 sodium silicate padding undertaken for fixation of dyes on cotton fabrics amounted to "curing" within Notification No. 253/82-C.E. so as to qualify the fabrics for exemption.
Analysis: The notification exempted cotton fabrics from duty when subjected to the processes listed in the table, including "curing or heat setting". The process used by the assessee was sodium silicate padding for fixing ramazol dyes. The relevant material showed that colour fixing could be achieved by heat, steam or chemical process, and the appeal memorandum itself indicated that sodium silicate padding was necessary for some dyestuffs. On that basis, the process was treated as comparable to curing, and the notification was not confined to heat treatment alone.
Conclusion: The process of sodium silicate padding was held to be curing within the meaning of the notification, and the assessee was entitled to the exemption.
Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge to the exemption failed, and the order granting relief to the assessee was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an exemption notification covers "curing or heat setting", a chemical process that serves the function of fixing dyes on fabrics may constitute curing if the evidence shows it to be part of the fabric-finishing process contemplated by the notification.