2000 (10) TMI 444

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re manufacturers of various products i.e. Diagnostic Ultra Sound Systems of various nature and had filed classification list 1/92-93 and the same was approved by the Assistant Collector granting the benefit. However, the Collector of Central Excise authorised the Asstt. Collector to file an application under Section 35 before the Collector (Appeals) against such approval of the classification list and granting the benefit to parts also. The Collector of Central Excise, later on took over as Collector (Appeals) and decided the matter and held that the Notification extends benefit only to complete system and not to the parts and as the notification has to be strictly construed, the benefit cannot be given to parts which are not specified in t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....granted by the Asstt. Collector was correct and his findings are required to be upheld. He contends that the duty had not been quantified and therefore the Collector (Appeals)'s finding that the demands are required to be restricted to six months is beyond the terms of the application filed by the Collector in the matter. 3. Shri S. Kannan, learned DR points out that Section Note and Chapter note cannot be relied upon for interpretating the Notification as this aspect has been well laid down in a large number of Tribunal judgments and in this regard he relied upon the judgment in the case of Reflect Option Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE as reported in 1997 (91) E.L.T. 637 (T). He further submits that a plain reading of the Notification is require....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der passed by any officer of the Central Excise below in rank, in terms of Section 35. In terms of Section 35A, Collector (Appeals) is required to determine and pass an order in respect of such appeal filed before him. In the present case, the Collector was transferred as Collector (Appeals) and he has decided the case in his capacity as Collector (Appeals). Merely because he had authorised his subordinate officer to file application before the Collector (Appeals) and he later became the Collector (Appeals) and decided the matter by virtue of Section 35A, it cannot be said that he was prejudiced in the matter and there was violation of principles of natural justice in the matter. We are also further not able to agree with the contention of ....