HYDERABAD POLYMERS (P) LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., HYDERABAD
LAWS(SC)-2004-3-152
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on March 18,2004

Hyderabad Polymers (P) Ltd. Appellant
VERSUS
Commissioner of C. Ex., Hyderabad Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This Appeal is against the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal dated 24th February, 1998.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts are as follows :- The Appellants are manufacturing HDPE Woven Tubular Fabrics on Circular Looms. They do this with the aid of power. It is not denied that that fabric would have fallen, at the relevant time, under Tariff Item 54.08. Thereafter, the fabric is cut and one end of the fabric is sewed up without the aid of power and a sack is manufactured. It is not denied that such a sack would fall under Tariff Item 6301 which reads as follows :- "6301.00 Made up textile articles in- Nil If made without eluding blankets (other than the aid of power of wool), tarpaulins, tent, sails for boats." The question for consideration is whether the Appellants are entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 65/87-C.E., dated 1st March, 1987.
(3.) The Show Cause Notice was issued to them on 17th June, 1991. It was for the period from 4th July, 1987 to 29th February, 1988. It appears that earlier in 1988 also a Show Cause Notice had been issued making a demand on a similar issue and for an identical amount. That Show Cause Notice was dropped. In pursuant to Show Cause Notice dated 17th June, 1991, the Collector passed an order dated 31st October, 1991 wherein, it is, inter alia, held as follows :- "11. On the question of time-bar, I agree with the noticee, that having issued a demand in 1988 on similar issue and for identical amount, the question of suppression or misdeclaration would not arise. I also agree with the contention that approval of classification list is a quasi judicial function to be done after making suitable enquiries by the adjudicating authority. There would therefore be no question of getting the classification list approved and it is rightly an order of the Assistant Collector. Later, even the RT 12 have been finally assessed. There is as such no misdeclaration or suppression on the part of the noticee." The Collector also held that the Appellants were entitled to the benefit of the Notification.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.