2006 (3) TMI 507

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - The lower authorities demanded duty of Rs. 4,32,000/- from the appellants for the period November 2002 to January 2003, denying them the benefit of Notification No. 6/2002 in respect of goods cleared as "non-conventional energy system/device" during the said period. Such systems/devices were exempt from payment of duty of excise in terms o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tional energy system/device". It has also been noted that all the components so cleared would not make up the said system/device. 2. After hearing both sides and considering their submissions, we find that the appellants have, admittedly, not observed the statutory procedure for piecemeal clearance of consignment in the above case. No wonder why the goods cleared by them were not recognized .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X