VARMA INDUSTRIALS LTD Vs. COMMR. OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against Order -in -Original No. 41 /93, dated 4 -5 -1993 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore wherein total duty of Rs. 15,83,895.33/ - has been confirmed in terms of four Show cause notices totally covering the period from 16 -3 -1976 to 31 -1 -1980. The issue involves the excisability and dutiability of dye grade cotton fabrics which emerge as an intermediate product in the process of manufacture of Cotton fabrics.

(2.) HEARD Shri R.C. Kumar, Learned Advocate for the appellants who submits as follows : -

(3.) LEARNED DR submits that on the issue of jurisdiction, etc., raised by the Learned Advocate, the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in full Bench judgment consisting of 3 Hon'ble Justices, in the; case of Saurashtra Cement and Chemicals Industries Ltd. v. Union of India as reported in 1995 (79) E.L.T. 367 (Guj.) has held that substitution of old Rules 10 and 10 A by new Rule 10 with effect from 6 -8 -1977 and substitution of that new Rule 10 later by Section 11A of the Act with effect from 17 -11 -1990 amounted to amendment and not a repeal and therefore remand notices issued under the old Rules and which were in force are enforceable even after substitution. He submits that the present facts are clearly covered by this full Bench decision which will prevail over the two Single Bench decision of the Madras High Court. With respect to the Learned Advocate's submission of the two revised Show cause notices suffering from time bar as they are to be treated as fresh notices. Learned DR submits the decision in the case of ACME Batteries Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E. as reported in 1991 (54) E.L.T. 256 (Tribunal) wherein it was held that a Show cause notice issued consequent upon and Order -in -Revision of Central Government directing de novo adjudication is to be treated as a continuance of earlier proceedings and is not time barred. Learned DR also reiterates all the findings of the Order -in -Original impugned.