2005 (12) TMI 427

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rder per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby demand was confirmed after denying the benefit of Notification No. 38/97-C.E. on the ground that the appellant had not complied with the conditions of the notification. 3. The contention of the appellant is that Notification .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ontention of the Revenue is that appellant filed the option for availing the benefit of Notification No. 38/97. However, the appellant had not filed any revised declaration as provided under Rule 173B of Central Excise Rules which is mandatory. Therefore, the benefit of notification has been rightly denied. 5. We find that in the present case, the benefit of Notification No. 38/97-C.E., dated 27 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X