TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (12) TMI 109
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y were engaged in the manufacture of grey cotton/polyester (52 : 48) blended fabrics on powerloom falling under Tariff Item 19(I)(a) of the Central Excise Tariff. The Officers found that the appellants had not obtained Central Excise Licence for the manufacture of grey cotton/polyester blended fabrics and had also no permission from the Textile Commissioner for installation and working of the powerlooms. Shri Anil Kumar Jain, partner of M/s. Avinash Chander Anil Kumar gave a statement on 18-9-1984 saying that they were sending grey cotton/polyester blended fabrics manufactured by them for processing to M/s. Sunflag Textile Ltd., Faridabad and after dyeing and finishing the goods were brought back. On 1-10-1984 the Officers visited premises ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assification list on behalf of the appellants that the processor agreed to discharge all the liability of Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944. The learned Counsel submitted that duty had been duly paid by the processor of the goods therefore there was no loss of revenue. The confirmation of the demand under Rule 9(1) of the Central Excise Rules was assailed on the ground that there was no clandestine removal. The demand further was mostly time-barred as it was for the period May, 1984 to September , 1984 issued on 8-3-1985. In any case there was not justification to impose penalty on the appellants. 3. Shri Vijay Singh, learned SDR contended that the exemption under Notification No. 253/82 had been rightly denied as no duty has been paid....