9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 1058X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent. [Order per : Jeet Ram Kait, Member (T)]. - This Revenue appeal filed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 235/97, dt. 9-6-97 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Trichy. The Department has submitted that the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not acceptable due to the following reasons which are reproduced below :- "There is no provision either in the Central E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect of the left over balance." The department had filed a reference application against the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Sri Venkateswara Textile Engineering v. CCE, Coimbatore passed by the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 15/96, dt. 20-10-95 which was relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of the same assessee against the same order-in-appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he department's grounds on appeal memorandum submitted by the Revenue. 3. Heard Shri Ajit Kumar, Director of the Respondent Company who has submitted that the ld. Commissioner has very categorically analysed all the findings that they are eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 1/93 up to the specified value and that the duty is payable only on the portion of the value which exceeds the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate clearance value was Rs. 51,50,000/- and it was held that normal rate of duty chargeable on the value in excess of concessional limit of Rs. 75 lakhs and not on total value of the goods covered by the gate pass. In view of the settled issue, Shri Ajit Kumar, Director of the Respondent Company, submitted that the appeal filed by the Revenue may be rejected. 4. Heard both sides. We are of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
