TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (4) TMI 190
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt, for the Respondents. [Order per : H.R. Syiem, Member (T)]. - This appeal dated 14th November, 1983 has been filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Madras against Order-in-Appeal No. 290/83(M) dated 26-8-1983 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Madras. 2. M/s. Addisons Paints & Chemicals Ltd. of Madras received nitrocellulose and chlorinated rubber, assessed under Item 68,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at M/s. Addisons Paints & Chemicals has wrongly taken as credit for the raw materials that still had not been used when assessment changed from Item 68 to 15A. 3. The Assistant Collector gave an order that said that Notifications 136/82-C.E. and 137/82-C.E. dated 22-4-1982 were not retrospective and so the factory would have to pay the duty that has been demanded. [We note here only that the Asst....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct. 6. The learned Counsel for the department said that after 1-3-1982 the raw materials were covered by a different tariff heading; so they were no longer entitled to the credit they had been enjoying. Therefore in respect of goods which were still to be taken into manufacturing process, it was correct to deny the credit and to recover whatever the assessee had taken into R.G. 23 as credit. 7. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e would still argue that the assessment had been changed for such goods and therefore the credit must not be taken. If they were logical, they should also have demanded duty from the nitrocellulose and chlorinated rubber manufacturer; this they obviously could not do because the assessments on the materials, all before 28-2-1982, were correct. Therefore, if the assessment under Item 68 was correct....