2008 (7) TMI 651

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ember (T) (for the Bench)]. This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 208/CE/APPL/NOIDA/2004 dated 14-7-04. 2. Heard both sides. 3.1 Learned advocate for the appellant submits that the dispute is about the applicability of exemption Notification No. 5/98-C.E. (S.No. 69 which was subject to the condition prescribed in S.No. 10 of the annexure to the said notifi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Hon ble Supreme Court. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions from both the sides. The submission of the learned Advocate that in the given facts and circumstances of the case no penalty is imposable is acceptable. Therefore, we confirm the duty demand as not contested. However, we set aside the penalty of Rs. 25,000/- imposed on the appellant. 5. The appeal is disposed of on the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X