1997 (11) TMI 333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r the Respondents. [Order per : Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)]. - The short question that calls for determination in both these appeals is whether the expression duty of excise leviable would include a situation when inputs have been removed after availing exemption. 2. Arguing for the assessee ld. Advocate submits that exemption in both cases is being claimed under Notification 208/83, date .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in para 12, the Hon'ble Apex Court made a distinction between exemption of duty paid 'at the appropriate rate' and 'duty paid'. He also cites the case of Andhra Re-rolling Works v. UOI 1986 (25) E.L.T. 3. 4. We have heard both sides. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Usha Martin Industries made a distinction between the exemption of duty and duty at appropriate rate. They explained the scope .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cation cannot be delinked from other words because the preceding words are "appropriate rate" and cannot be ignored. Similarly here the payment of duty cannot be delinked from the expression duty of excise or additional excise duty leviable used in Notification 208/83. 5. In view of this, we reject the Revenue appeal in case of Aruna Steel Rolling Mills and allow the appeal in case of Apeeja .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X