TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 338X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocates, for the Appellant. Ms. Bhagyadevi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. - In all these 12 appeals a common question of law and facts are involved hence, they are taken up together for disposal as per law. The appellants claimed the benefit of Customs Notification No. 81/95 in respect of packing materials namely paper Board Boxes and Paper Trays ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly noted that the benefit of notification C.N. 81/95 is applicable to packing materials but, however, in view of the Apex Court judgment he was not willing to grant the benefit of the notification and dismissed the appeals. Hence, all these appeals. 2. We have heard ld. Advocate, Shri. Radhakrishnan and Shri Arokiaswamy, Consultant along with Shri Suresh, CA, for the appellants and Ms. Bhagyadev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the case of M/s. Prestige Engg. (I) Ltd. We have perused this judgment and notice that the Hon ble Apex Court had rendered its judgment in the context of the Notification No. 119/75-C.E., which pertains to job work carried out by the small scale manufactures. Therefore, the Notification No. 119/75-C.E. dealt with in M/s. Prestige Engg. India Ltd. has no bearing on the interpretation of Notif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the cardboard boxes. As stated earlier, the Commissioner (Appeals) has clearly held that the benefit of notification is applicable and has wrongly applied the Apex Court judgment rendered in the case of M/s. Prestige Engg. (supra) which clearly is distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the case. In that view of the matters, the impugned orders are set aside and appeals are allowed. Ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
