Order No. 3025/98-WZB/C-I arising from in Appeal No. E/385/91-Bom. Case: Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs Vs Bajaj Auto Ltd.. Central Information Commission
| Case Number | Order No. 3025/98-WZB/C-I arising from in Appeal No. E/385/91-Bom |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Shri A.R.S. Kumar, JDR. |
| Judges | Shri K.S. Venkataramani, Vice President and J.N. Srinivasa Murthy, Member (J) |
| Issue | Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rule 196BB |
| Citation | 1999 (111) ELT 874 (Tribunal) |
| Judgement Date | July 28, 1998 |
| Court | Central Information Commission |
Order:
K.S. Venkataramani, Vice President, (West Zonal Bench At Mumbai)
-
The appeal has been filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Aurangabad against the order dated 28-2-1991 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai. The facts are that respondents applied to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for transfer of Draw Die Petrol Tank which is a Die for machine trial to another party in Mumbai, who manufacture Press machine. The Draw Die Petrol Tank had been received by the Respondents under Chapter X Procedure of the Central Excise Rules under nil duty gate pass on 11-5-1985. The Assistant Commissioner by his letter dated 3-1-1990 informed them that they cannot remove the draw die petrol tank under Rule 196BB of Central Excise Rules, because the goods have been received under Chapter X Procedure and the Notification under which they were so received [Notification] No. 167/79 had since been withdrawn. The appeal against the Assistant Commissioner order was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) who held that once the goods are received under Chapter X Procedure, then further removals are to be regulated under the provisions of Rule 196BB.
-
Shri A.R.S. Kumar, the ld. JDR referred to the grounds of appeal and submitted that though the goods were received under Chapter X procedure while Notification No. 167/79 was in force, the provisions of Chapter X of Central Excise Rules cannot be applied even after the notification itself has been withdrawn. The Respondents are not present, but have asked for decision on merits. We find that the Notification No. 167/79 is one which grants the exemption...
To continue reading
Request your trial