Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Shree Badrinarayan Silk Mills

1. the revenue challenges the order or the commissioner (appeals) who has set aside the duty demand of rs. 63,022/- confirmed against the respondents herein from whose commercial premises 3707 cut pieces of processed man-made fabrics were seized on 19-12-96 as not being covered by the duty paying documents for reason that the respondents were not the manufacturer of the goods in question.2. i have heard the id. dr. the respondents are absent in spite of notice and hence i perused the records. the respondent's plea that they are traders in processed man-made fabrics and that they were getting grey man-made fabrics processed from independent process house or alternatively make outright purchase of processed fabrics from other wholesale traders, has been accepted by the commissioner (appeals) and has not been challenged by the revenue in the appeal before the tribunal. the revenue's appeal recognized that the goods in question were manufactured on behalf of the respondents by the job workers. the failure of the respondents to follow the procedure for sending goods to job workers cannot result in their being held to be the manufacturer so as to give rise to duty liability.3. in view of the above, i uphold the finding of the commissioner (appeals) that the duty demand is not sustainable as the respondents from whose shop contraband man-made fabrics were seized is not the manufacturer of the man-made fabrics, and reject the appeal of the revenue.