TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (8) TMI 86
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is covered by Tariff Item No. 68. 2. If the item is held to be covered by Tariff Item No. 26AA (ia) the petitioner will be entitled to the exemption granted by Notification No. 75/67, dated 20th May, 1967, issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The result of this writ application, therefore, is dependent on the decision as to which tariff item covers M.S. rivets. 3. The second column of Item No. 26AA(ia) of the Tariff which is said to be applicable according to the petitioner is in the following terms : "Bars, rods, coils, wires, joists, girders, angles, other than slotted angles, channels other than slotted channels, tees, beams, zeds, trough piling, and all other rolled, forged or extruded shapes and sections, not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed it and for restoring orders in Annexures 1(a) and 1(b). 5. According to the case made-out in the writ application, M.S. rivets are prepared to predetermined shape by a process of hot pressing known as forging out of duty paid iron rods and thus attract Item No. 26AA. By an application filed later in this case, the petitioner further asserted that the question whether M.S. rivets were covered under Tariff (Item) No. 68 or Tariff Item No. 26AA was raised throughout the country and as different States were not consistent in their stand, the matter was referred to the Central Board of Excise and Customs who after consideration issued an advice being Tariff Advice No. 37/82, dated 13th July, 1982, declaring that the disputed item was cover....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d with Annexure 2 has been described by the petitioner's Counsel as retrospective demand and has been challenged as ultra vires on this basis also. Lastly, it was suggested that, in any event, the Assistant Collector should have heard the petitioner before issuing Annexure 2 and should have disposed of the petitioner's objection by a speaking order. 10. The learned Standing Counsel, Central Government, raised a preliminary objection that as the petitioner has not availed of the remedy of appeal, the writ application should be dismissed without considering the points urged by the petitioner. In reply, Mr. Mahto argued that the writ application having been admitted in 1979 cannot now be defeated on the ground of alternative remedy being av....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....here a ring shaped portion of its head is removed by punching". 13. Chapter VIIA of the Rules deals with removal of excisable goods on determination of duty by producers, manufacturers or private warehouse licensees. Rule 173B directs an assessee to file with the proper officer a list for approval in prescribed form and it is provided further that the officer shall, after making necessary enquiry, approve the list with such modification as may be considered necessary and duty payable on the goods in question intended to be removed shall be determined according to the approved list. has been stated earlier, the petitioner's classification list as contained in Annexures 1, 1(a) and 1(b) were duly approved. Sub-rule (5) permits modification....