TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (8) TMI 533
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... initiated against the appellants by issue of eight show cause notices for various periods starting from 8/2001 to 7/2002, on allegation that the appellants have not paid any duty on the grey fabrics while returning the fabrics to Loyal Textile Mills Kovilpatti (M/s. LTM) after processing and inasmuch as the fabrics were not procured by the sender viz. M/s. Loyal Textile Mills, Kovilpatti but were manufactured by themselves, the benefit of Notification No. 43/2001 is not applicable to the grey fabrics received by the assessee-appellants for processing and return. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of processed cotton yarn (52.03), processed polyester Yarn (55.09), Processed cotton fab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....processed goods by the appellants herein to the principal manufacturer viz. M/s. LTM was effected under valid permission granted by the proper officer. He submitted that Central Excise Rules, 1944 was superseded and Central Excise (No. 2) Rules, 2001 was notified and Rule 13 of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, was replaced with Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules 2001. In terms of sub-rule (2) of Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001 any material may be removed without payment of duty for further use in the manufacture or processing of export goods which are exported, as may be approved by the Commissioner. He submitted that the sub-rule (2) of Rule 19 ibid does not stipulate any condition or circumstances except that the removal must be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n or stipulation under Rule 19(2) that the goods that are sent by the manufacturer exporter for further process should not have been produced by such exporter himself. The learned Counsel also submitted, if the benefit is restricted only to the procurement goods, it would lead to a situation that only merchant, exporters who procure yarn/grey fabrics will be allowed to function under Rule 19 whereas a manufacturer-exporter who is a manufacturer of yarn/fabric cannot avail the facility to get the processed yarn/fabrics without payment of duty. He has further submitted that benefit of Notification No. 214/86-C.E. is admissible to the appellants as the processed fabrics and yarn cleared from the factory of the appellants as job work are not ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-3-1986 as the goods of the appellants are not covered by the exemption in terms of the said Notification and hence the benefit has been correctly denied. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions and gone through the case records. We observe that in the instant case, the benefit of Notification No. 43/2001-CE, dated 26-6-2001 has been denied to the appellants on the ground that the said notification enables the procurement of excisable goods without payment of duty, removal for processing and return of the goods without payment of duty and as against that the goods in the present case have been manufactured by the principal manufacturer and not procured by them. We note that this Notification has been issued in exercise of the ....