TMI Blog2001 (5) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J)]. The appellant is engaged in manufacture of compound rubber falling under Chapter 40 of the Schedule of Central Excise Tariff Act. The appellant claimed exemption for the compound rubber under Notification No. 152/87, dated 25-5-1987. The Assistant Commissioner who adjudicated the proceeding passed an order holding that the appellant manufactur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l has been filed. He submitted that in the circumstances there was no justification to pass an order confirming the demand since the product is one and the same. Apart from this, he submitted that the issue with reference to the exemption has already been considered by the Tribunal in a series of cases including in the case of Umbergaon Rubber (P) Ltd. - 1992 (62) E.L.T. 576 (Tribunal) as well as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onal - 1999 (109) E.L.T. 524 (Tribunal), wherein it was held that an exemption can be claimed at any stage and cannot be denied as an afterthought. He relied upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Mahendra Mills and Others, 2000 (243) ITR 56 (SC), in support of his contention that SSI exemption is a nature of privilege and cannot be converted into disadv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was made before the Tribunal. 4. We have carefully considered the matter. We find that the appellant has placed decision of the Tribunal in the case of Umbergaon (supra) before the authorities below on the ground that decision is squarely applicable. The Commissioner (Appeals) has not given any cogent reason why the said decision is not applicable to the facts of this case. Further we agree wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
