1984 (3) TMI 396

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rising out of our above order. After considering all the arguments which were pressed for by the appellants at the time of hearing of their appeal before this Bench, the Bench had held in the aforesaid order that - (1) The appellants were not entitled to clear their goods (textile machinery parts etc. falling under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff) free of duty under exemption notification Nos. 176/77-C.E. dated 18-6-77, 89/79-C.E. dated 1-3-79 and 105/80-C.E. dated 18-6-80 and their pleas of certain clearances being out of pre-Budget stocks or out of goods made without the aid of power advanced in support of their claim were found to be untenable. (2) The appellants were guilty of suppression of facts; further, they were also gui....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot alter or reduce the rate but only remitted a portion of the duty payable. No question of tariff classification was involved in the appellants' case. (2) Questions whether certain clearances of theirs were out of pre-Budget stocks or out of goods made without the aid of power were question of fact and not question relating to rate of duty. 3. The Department's representative stated that in the case of Orient Weaving Mills (P) Lid. & others v. Union of India and others [1978 E.L.T. (J 311], the Supreme Court had observed that exemption notifications modified the rate of duty. He argued that all the points raised by the appellant's were inseparably connected with the question of rate of duty. In support of his argument, he cited v....