2001 (6) TMI 358

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dvocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jeet Ram Kait, Member (T)]. The Revenue is aggrieved with the Order of Commissioner (Appeals) in his Order-in-Appeal No. 39/96 (M) dated 16-2-1996. In para 2 of his order he has held as follows :- In my earlier Order-in-Appeal No. 230/95(M) dated 10-11-1995, among other things, I have held as follows : It is clear that unlike cosmetic toilet .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sition of any penalty. Following the above ratio, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential benefit. 2. Heard ld. SDR Shri Sreekumar Menon, who reiterates the grounds of appeal. 3. Ld. Counsel has invited our attention to the following judgments :- (i) CCE Hyderabad v. Charminar Bottling Co. Ltd. reported in 2000 (117) E.L.T. 205 (Tri.); (ii) Black .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X