2008 (2) TMI 203

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri V.S. Sejpal, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per: K.K. Agarwal, Member (T)]. - This is Revenue's appeal. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The present appeal involves classification of various products manufactured by Vinit Industries which they claimed to be classifiable under Tariff item 15AA of the then existing Tariff. They were however issued a show cause notice stating that the it....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ication confirmed by the Tribunal has to be followed and Commissioner's Order has to be upheld. 4. Revenue in its appeal has contended that Commissioner should not have confirmed the classification without verifying the manufacturing process. However it has nowhere contended that the manufacturing process as adopted by the respondents was different than what they have claimed but have only stat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ity of exemption Notification No. 101/66, dated 17-6-1966 which exempts duty paid surface active preparation containing less than five percent of principal active ingredients from Central Excise duty. It is the Revenue's case that this exemption has been extended by the Commissioner without verifying as to whether the surface active preparation manufactured by them was having principal surface act....