The short question involved in these Appeals is regarding the validity of Circular No.38/2000 Cus dated 10th May, 2000.
43 47 of 2008.
Respondent is engaged in the business of textile and manufacturing of textile goods, viz.,
Civil Appeal Nos.2578 2583 of 2001 are against the order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 12th September, 2000 whereas Civil Appeal No.91 of 2002 is against the order dated 12th June, 2001 passed by the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, in short CEGAT New Delhi.
It is the foundation for availing the benefits under the numberification.
Against the decision of the Calcutta High Court Special Leave Petition Nos CC Nos.
The said imported goods fell under Tariff Heading 32041559.
The said companytention was upheld.
Urging that numberexcise duty was payable on the said goods in view of the numberification dated 1.03.2006, the respondent preferred appeals aggrieved thereby.
Dystar Indigo VAT 40 per cent SOL Indigo Powder 90 per cent Wettable.
The Calcutta High Court by its Judgment dated 16th October, 2001 had also quashed the circular.
By the two impugned orders the circulars have been quashed.
9727 9731 of 2003 had been filed.
The special leave petition thereagainst was dismissed by this Court stating These Appeals can be disposed of by this companymon order.
The circular had also been challenged in the Calcutta High Court.
4/2006 CE dated 1.03.2006 is in question in these appeals which arise out of a judgment and order dated 30.04.2008 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal for short the Tribunal , Principal Bench, New Delhi in Custom Appeal Nos.
The said appeal, by reason of the impugned judgment, has been dismissed.
This position was also elaborated in Thermax Private Limited case supra .
Those Special Leave Petitions were withdrawn by learned Attorney General on 19th January, 2004.
Appellant approached the Tribunal thereagainst.
B. SINHA, J Interpretation of an exemption numberification bearing No.
