2000 (8) TMI 483

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Appellant. Shri S.P. Seth, Advocate, for the Respondents. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. -  Each of the two respondents to these appeals was engaged in processing of bleached fabrics received in its factory. After such processing the fabrics were removed without payment of duty in terms of Notification 47/94 by following the Chapter X procedure to persons, manufact....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....been removed without payment of duty under Chapter X procedure. He also imposed penalty on each of these assessees. 2. The assessees appeals against these orders to the Commissioner (Appeals). He allowed these appeals by following the ratio of the decisions of the Tribunal in Orissa Synthetics v. CCE - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 35; Reliance Industries v. CCE - 1995 (78) E.L.T. 595 and Sriram Rayons....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bunal has clearly concluded that goods removed for purpose of export in terms of Rule 13 are not to be equated with goods removed under an exemption notification or at nil rate of duty. It is only in the latter category of cases that Rule 57C would apply. Reliance on the Tribunal decision in Dujodwala Resins and Terpenes Ltd. v. CCE - 1997 (93) E.L.T. 451 and Gujarat Communications & Electronics v....