TMI Blog1999 (4) TMI 394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in said paragraph and to pay duty of excise at the rate applicable to the specified goods but for the exemption contained in the said Paragraph 1, subject to the condition that such manufacturer shall pay duty at the rate applicable but for aforesaid exemption on all subsequent clearances of specified goods made after availing such option, in a financial year in which such date of option falls. It is clear from the above, that the option for normal rate of duty or concessional rate of duty under Notfn. No. 1/93 can only be exercised once in a financial year. Accordingly the stand taken by the adjudicating authority denying the claim of the appellant is in line with the provisions of the Notification. Therefore, I do not find any reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation earlier but when they came to know that this had been amended, they filed classification list on 19-5-1995 claiming the benefit of Notfn. No. 1/93. He submits that they had filed a classification list on 16-3-1995 in which they had claimed payment of duty under the normal rate. He submits that though the Notfn. No. 59/95 was issued on 16-3-1995. However, as they were not aware of this notification, therefore as soon as they became aware of the amending Notfn. No. 59/95, they filed a classification list claiming the benefit. He submits that similar issue came up before the Tribunal in the case of Watts Electronics (P) Limited [1994 (70) E.L.T. 127] wherein this Tribunal held that SSI exemption under Notfn. No. 175/86 was available even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contended that they came to know of the amendment in the notification only late and accordingly they claimed the benefit only when they became aware that they were entitled to the exemption under amended Notfn. No. 1/93. There is nothing to show that the notification was to be availed from the first day of the financial year. I have also perused the case cited which supports the view that it is not necessary to avail the exemption of notification from first day of the financial year and that the assessee can avail this exemption even from the middle of the financial year. Though, the Tribunal s decision is on Notfn. No. 175/86, however, the issue decided on this notification is similar to the one as in the present case. I, therefore hold th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
