1996 (12) TMI 192

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... M/s. Atita Traders and demands duty from them and imposes penalty on the ground mentioned therein. 3. A Show cause notice issued for clubbing the clearances of three units namely, M/s. Atita Traders, M/s. Aparajita Traders and M/s. Ananta Chemicals & Plastic Pvt. Ltd. 4. In so far as M/s. Aparajita Traders are concerned, in the adjudication order, the Learned Collector has held, inter alia that they are liable to pay duty on the entire quantity of "Silicon Oil" on "Silicon Emulsion" irrespective of the fact as to whether it was shown as manufactured in their unit or others unit. 5. However, at this stage, he does not propose to enter into that controversy as to whether such de facto clubbing was justified or not for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... E.L.T. 652 that silicon emulsion was eligible for exemption under Notification No. 101/66-C.E., dated 17-6-1966. 10. In view of this position it is not necessary to go into various facts and controversies referred to in the order-in-original and it would serve their purpose if in the light of above order of the Tribunal, and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the product is held as classifiable under 15AA and exempted from duty in terms of Notification No. 101/66-C.E. (as amended). 11. He is claiming the benefit of this Notification under Sl. No. 4 of the Table annexed to this Notification because it applies to such products manufactured from material on which appropriate amount of duty of excise or the additional d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The Learned DR drew attention to the order-in-original and particulary to the observations of the Collector that since no samples had been drawn in this connection therefore, the identity or the composition of the product cannot be established or re-established at this stage and therefore, it was not possible to accept their contention that it was classifiable under 15AA. 15. It was his submission that the Tribunal's orders and the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment cited by the Learned Counsel could be applied only if it could be shown that the product was identical to the one which was the subject matter of these orders. 16. The Learned Counsel stated that it was department's own case, as reflected in the show cause no....