TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (11) TMI 336
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... manufactured with the aid of power, confiscating two electric motor pumps and pipelines with option to redeem on payment of a fine of Rs. 25,000/- and imposing a penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/-. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plasticizer and thinner falling under sub-heading 2917.00 and 3814.00 respectively of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. In their classification list No. 18/89-90 they claimed exemption for thinner under Notification No. 230/86 which grants total exemption from payment of duty to certain goods specified in Col. 3 of the table annexed thereto and falling under heading or sub-headings of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 specified in Col. 2 of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellants had installed dummy S.R. pumps to avoid detection of use of power in the manufacture of thinner, it was alleged that the appellants had suppressed the fact of manufacture of thinner with the aid of power and wilfully mis-declared the same in the approved classification list and removed 2,55,054 litres and 60,400 kgs of thinner during the period 8-12-1988 to 24-1-1990. A show cause notice was issued proposing recovery of duty on this quantity of thinner and also proposing imposition of penalty. The duty demand and penalty were confirmed by the adjudicating authority; hence this appeal. 5. We have heard Shri J.S. Aggarwal, learned Advocate and Sh. J.M. Sharma, learned DR. We find that the appellants have not been able to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s held that power is used in any of these operations in relation to the manufacture, the process is carried on with the aid of power. 6. The learned Counsel Sh. Agarwal attempted to distinguish this judgment by pointing out that Notification No. 179/77-C.E., dated 18-6-1977 which was the subject matter of interpretation by the Apex Court was worded differently i.e. it exempted all goods falling under T.I. 68 "in or in relation to the manufacture of which no process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power" while in the present case, Notification 230/86 grants exemption to thinners etc. "made without the aid of power". The contention is that this expression occurring in Notification 230/86 has to be interpreted in a narrow manner....