Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Matchwell Engineers

Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus. vs Matchwell Engineers

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Sep 23, 2000

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/19217

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/19217
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Sep 23, 2000
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus.

Respondent

Matchwell Engineers

Legal References

Reported In: (2000)(122)ELT785Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. in the order impugned in these appeals, the commissioner (appeals) confirmed the view of the asstt. commissioner that the respondent was entitled to the benefit of the notification 16/94 as amended by notification 74/94 for the compounded rubber manufactured by it and captively consumed in the manufacture of rubber plates and sheets, which were in turn captively used in the manufacture of rubberised cylinders.2. the grounds in the appeals are that the condition in serial number 6 of the table to the notification that the compounded rubber is used in the manufacture of goods falling within chapter 40 has not been complied with since the rubberised cylinder, which is the final product, is classifiable not in chapter 40 but in chapter 85. this point was explained in detail by the departmental representative.3. in his two decisions, one in which the present assessee was the appellant and the other in which it was the respondent, (appeals e/a4289/94-c and e/1037/92-b1) the tribunal has held that the benefit of notification would be available for the reason that the compounded rubber is used in the manufacture of rubber sheets and strips.

Full Judgment

1. In the order impugned in these appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the view of the Asstt. Commissioner that the respondent was entitled to the benefit of the Notification 16/94 as amended by Notification 74/94 for the compounded rubber manufactured by it and captively consumed in the manufacture of rubber plates and sheets, which were in turn captively used in the manufacture of rubberised cylinders.

2. The grounds in the appeals are that the condition in serial number 6 of the table to the notification that the compounded rubber is used in the manufacture of goods falling within chapter 40 has not been complied with since the rubberised cylinder, which is the final product, is classifiable not in chapter 40 but in chapter 85. This point was explained in detail by the departmental representative.

3. In his two decisions, one in which the present assessee was the appellant and the other in which it was the respondent, (appeals E/A4289/94-C and E/1037/92-B1) the Tribunal has held that the benefit of notification would be available for the reason that the compounded rubber is used in the manufacture of rubber sheets and strips.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus. vs Matchwell Engineers Same Subject Excise