2001 (2) TMI 487

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....SDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : K.K. Bhatia, Member (T)]. - The appellants are manufacturers of cotton yarn, cellulosic spun yarn and non-cellulosic spun yarn falling under Chapter headings 52 and 55 of the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. They were issued a show cause notice dated 1-12-1994 in which it was, inter alia, alleged that during the manufacture of artificial staple fibre yarn, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the findings arrived at by the original authority. 2. The present appeal is against the above order of Commissioner (Appeals). 3. We have heard Shri K.R. Natarajan, Advocate, for the appellants and Shri G. Sreekumar Menon, SDR for the respondents. 4. The ld. Advocate for the appellants relied on the decision of the CEGAT in the case of Rajasthan Textile Mills v. CCE, Jaipur [1999....