COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD Vs. OLYMPIC SYNTHETICS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Revenue has preferred the present appeal. We have heard Shri D.S. Negi, learned SDR appearing for the Revenue and Shri M.A. Patel, learned Consultant appearing for the respondent.

(2.) AS per the facts on record, the respondent is engaged in manufacture of HDPE tapes, fabrics and sacks falling under Chapter 39 of CETA, 1985. During the period relevant for the purpose of present appeal, i.e. from 1 -7 -1989 to 25 -9 -1992, the dispute was as regards correct classification of HDPE tapes and fabrics. The classification was approved by the authorities under Chapter 64 on which the respondents paid the duty under protest in as much as they claimed the correct classification under Chapter 39. Subsequently, the Govt. of India issued order No. 8/92, dated 24 -9 -1992 u/s 37B of CEA, 1944, classifying the tape under sub heading 3920.32 and sack made there from under sub heading 3926.90 and directed the authorities to demand duty under Chapter 39 and to adjust the modvat and grant refund, if any. Accordingly, the respondent filed the refund claim on 24 -6 -1996 for the period 1 -7 -1989 to 25 -5 -1992.

(3.) THE said refund claim made by the respondent made various rounds of litigation before the Commissioner (Appeals) as also before Tribunal and various orders passed in de novo proceedings, as detailed in the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The matter finally came before the Commissioner (Appeals), who allowed the refund along with payment of interest in terms of Para 11BB of CEA, 1944. For better appreciation, we reproduce the Paras 10 and 11 of the Commissioner (Appeals)s order.