ORDER
S.L. Peeran, Member (J)
1. This is a revenue appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 326/98 (CBE), dated 18-9-97 by which the Commissioner has granted the benefit of Notification No. 26/94, dated 1-3-94 on the clearances of cotton yarn and non-cellulosic spun yarn under Headings 52 and 55 of the Tariff Act. The assessee had cleared the same and had paid duty. Assessee-respondent received the consideration for the sale of goods in the form of Demand Drafts. The lower authorities had contended that the notification stipulates the condition of receipt of payment by cheques and therefore the benefit cannot be extended and also that they are not registered as Co-operative Society. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted their plea that they have been registered as Handloom Development Corporation and they are incorporated by Articles of Association under the Company’s Act. He has also upheld their contention that payment can be made through Demand Drafts or cheques or by Letter of Credit. In this regard, he has relied on the Tribunal judgment rendered in the case of Baripada Spinning Mills reported in 1997 (93) E.L.T. 687 (T).
2. In the present appeal, revenue is contesting only on the ground of receipt of consideration by DD and contends that notification stipulates in unequivocal terms that the payment for the yarn should be made by cheques drawn by the Co-operative Society or Corporation of its own account. In view of this submission, Id. SDR submits that the order is required to be set aside as conditions of the notification have not been fulfilled.
3. On the other hand, Ld. Consultant, Shri S. Kandaswamy submits that the issue is no longer res Integra and on that very notification, the judgment of the Tribunal rendered in Baripada Spinning Mills (supra) has been rightly taken note of by the Commissioner to accept their contention. He submits that the same view was again followed by the Tribunal in the following cases :-
(1) Assam Cotton Mills v. CCE, Shillong -1999 (105) E.L.T. 60 (T) (2) Shree Ehawani Cotton Mills & Ind. Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh - 2000 (115) E.L.T. 79 (T) (3) CCE, Jaipur v. Modern Syntax (India) Ltd. - 1999 (112) E.L.T. 714 (T)
4. We have carefully considered the submissions and from the grounds of appeal, we notice that the only one issue has been raised before us for consideration that the benefit of the notification cannot be granted if payment for yarn has been received by any means other than cheque drawn by the Co-operative Society or Corporation on its own account. This issue was considered by the Tribunal in the case of Baripada Spinning Mills v. CCE (supra) which judgment was noted by the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order. This judgment relies on the earlier judgment of the Tribunal rendered in Collector v. Aska Spinning Mills – 1999 (106) E.L.T. 418 (T) – 1996 (63) ECR 279 (T). Thereafter, the Tribunal had an occasion to reconsider the matter in the case of Shree Bhawani Cotton Mills & Ind. Ltd. (supra) wherein also it has been held that payment by Demand Draft/Pay Order is substantial compliance of the condition of Notification, if the Pay Order/DDs were obtained by issue of cheque on the account of registered co-operative society maintained in the Bank. This judgment has taken note of previous judgments cited supra wherein the same view has been expressed. In view of consistent view, the ratio laid down by the Tribunal, we are bound to follow the same as a coordinate bench. Respectfully, following the Tribunal judgments, we do not find any merit in this appeal and hence same is rejected.