2004 (11) TMI 456

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. Shri A.K. Saxena, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of paper and paperboard classifiable under chapter 48 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. In their classification list effective from 1-3-94, the appellant claimed the benefit of Notification No. 1/93. The said classification list was approved by the prope .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion by extending the benefit of notification, as claimed. Revenue challenged the above order before the Commissioner (Appeals), who reversed the same and allowed the Revenue appeal. Hence the present appeal. 3. We have heard the Shri A.K. Saxena, ld. JDR appearing for the Revenue and Shri Hardik Modh, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant. 4. For better appreciation paragraph 2(C.C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... smuch as the appellant were admittedly not availing the benefit of Notification No. 1/93, during the relevant period when they made their claim under exemption Notification No. 23/94, the benefit cannot be denied to them. Both the Notification was issued under section 5(A) of the Central Excise Act and the assessee was having an option to avail any of them unless there is a condition debarring the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X