9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (3) TMI 627X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. - This appeal has been filed against the order of the Collector (Appeals) who had held that the appellants were not entitled to the benefit of Notf. No. 281/86 dated 24-4-86 inasmuch as this notification required not only the manufacture in a workshop within a factory but also required that this exemption shall be applicable to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r repairs of kilns etc., therefore, they were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 281/86 dated 24-4-86. However, the lower authorities denied the benefit of Notification No. 281/86 as indicated above. 3. Shri R. Swaminathan, ld. Consultant appears for the appellants and submits that in case the appellants are denied the benefit of Notification No. 281/86, then they were entitled to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ured by them were not wholly intended for use in the machines installed in the factory and that some part of the goods was being cleared by the appellants for sale outside. Regarding the decisions of this Tribunal in the cases cited by the appellants, he submitted that those cases deal only with one part of the Notification inasmuch as they deal with the location of the workshop and not with the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngly. 6. Insofar as Notification No. 217/86 is concerned, we find that this is for the first time that the benefit under this notification has been claimed by the assessees. Since this notification was not claimed by the assessees before the lower authorities, we consider it a fit case for remand. In the circumstances, we remand the case to the Assistant Collector for examination of the admi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
