TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 797X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is in the name of sister concern who was also supplying the goods to the appellant. The appellant’s contention is that such certificate was produced before the jurisdictional Central Excise Officer. In absence of any challenge to the earlier order of Commissioner (Appeals) we agree with the learned Advocate that substantial benefit should be extended to them - Decided in favour of assessee. - E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... NICEF having jurisdiction of Central Excise authorities in support of their claim for the benefit of exemption in terms of the said notification. Subsequently, they were issued a show cause notice dated 1-5-2003 alleging that the certificate is not in the name of the appellant. The said certificate was in the name of M/s. Serval Electronics Pvt. Ltd. As such, the Revenue entertained a view that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evenue. 4. The learned Joint CDR appearing for Revenue submits that production of valid certificate is one of the essential condition of notification and should be strictly adhered to. In the present case, though the appellant has produced the certificate but the same is not in the name of UNICEF as such, it cannot be held to a valid certificate. 5. We have gone through the earlier said order- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
