2000 (4) TMI 361

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Appellant. Shri N.C. Roy Chowdhury, Sr. Advocate, for the Respondents. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Shri S.K. Roy Chowdhury, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants prays for dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty amount of Rs. 1,13,58,922.00 and penalty of Rs. 5 lac imposed by the Commissioner, C. Ex., Calcutta. 2. Arguing on the application S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nded cotton yarn fabric have to be treated as cotton fabric because of predominance of cotton in the product. The said notification in question does not contain any separate definition of cotton fabric. Section Note 2(A) has to be applied and cotton yarn fabric has to be treated covering the blended cotton fabric. He submits that the wording of Notification No. 57/87 which was the subject matter o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....un yarn only and Polypropylene fibres blended with other types of fibres will not qualify for the exemption. As such he submits that the issue having been decided in principle by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the benefit of Notifications involved in the present case would not be available to the appellants. He also submits that the Department has filed a reference application against the earlier orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on yarn admittedly is classified as cotton yarn under heading 52.06. Same is considered to be cotton yarn because of Section Note. As such factually the present case is different than the Rajasthan Spg. and Wvg. Mills case. 5. Nothing has been pleaded on financial hardship by the appellants. 6. We have considered the submissions of both sides. We note that though the earlier order ....