Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills vs Collr. Of C. Ex. on 17 September, 1999
Equivalent citations: 2000(115)ELT586(TRI-DEL)
ORDER Lajja Ram, Member (T)
1. In this appeal filed by M/s. Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills Limited, the matter relates to the classification of woollen fabrics which the Appellants had claimed to be shoddy blankets and the Revenue had classified as other woollen fabrics under subheading 5107.10.
2. We have heard Shri L.P. Asthana, ld. Counsel for the Appellants and Shri V.M. Udhoji, ld. DR, for the Revenue.
3. The ld. Counsel submits that for the period prior to 1-4-1992, Woollen blankets were being treated as shoddy blankets and no proceedings had been initiated in respect of earlier clearances. Subsequently also there is no dispute and tariff exemption for their fabrics had been extended. The proceedings were drawn on the ground that the procedural requirements as per Board's circular dated 26-5-1988 had not been complied with and the appellants had been penalised for the same and their value of clearances have been based on conjuctures and assumptions. The Tariff rate itself for shoddy blankets was Nil rate. He submitted that for procedural requirements the classification could not be disturbed and prayed for allowing the appeal.
4. In reply, the ld. DR mentioned that in spite of repeated requests the appellants had not maintained the records like operation cards, etc. and that the proceedings initiated against them under the show cause notice were culminated in the adjudication order.
5. We find that only ground taken by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in confirming the order of the Adjudicating Authority was that the Appellants had given no reasons as to why the operation cards could not be maintained by them when they were directed to do so in terms of Board's Circular and the Commissionerate's Trade Notice. He had observed that the classification of the goods manufactured could not be assumed to be under sub-heading 5107.10(b) of the Central Excise Tariff Act in the absence of any evidence thereof. We find that the appellants were enjoying the benefit of the exemption prior to 1-4-1992 and nothing has been placed on record that after 31-11-1992 their goods were not being treated as shoddy blankets. The Revenue has not placed any record to show that the goods produced were other than shoddy blankets. We also take note of the facts as referred by the ld. Counsel and consider that no evidence has been placed on record to justify the classification of the goods in question under sub-heading 5107.99. In view of the above discussions, we set aside the impugned order in Appeal and as a result the appeal is allowed.