TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 499X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for considering the plea of the appellants for the benefit of the Notification - Hence, the appeals are disposed - C/209-217/2010 - 878-886/2010 - Dated:- 10-8-2010 - Shri M. Veeraiyan, JJ REPRESENTED BY : Shri S. Krishnanandh, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A.B. Niranjan Babu, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order] . - All these appeals, by the same appellants, are arising out of common order in appeal C. Cus. No. 33 to 41 dated 4-1-2010. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellants imported fabrics and filed nine Bills of Entries on various dates starting from 7-8-09 to 2-9-09, claiming classification under various sub-headings such as 5007.2090, 5210.2190, 5408.2120, 5408.3490, 5408.21 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sanctioned unless assessment orders were challenged. They were indeed aggrieved that they were not able to avail the benefit of Notification No. 30/04-C.E. dt. 9-7-04. He also submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) could have remanded the matter to the original authority for consideration of their above plea. He also submits that they are eligible for the benefit of the Notification No. 30/04, in the light of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Mapsa Tapes Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, reported in 2009 (247) E.L.T. 188 (Tri.-Del.). 5. Ld. SDR submits that the assessing authority has accepted all the claims as made by them in the Bills of Entries relating to classification and the exemptions. That being the case, they cannot be considered as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndustries Ltd. v. CC reported in 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.). Further, the submission that the claim for benefit of exemption Notification can be made at any stage as held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Share Medical Care v. UOI reported in 2007 (209) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.), deserves to be appreciated. Therefore, the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appellants failed to inform the assessing authority that they were aggrieved over the assessment orders and therefore channel of appeal was not open to them is not legal and proper. It is also noticed that the claim for benefit of Notification No. 30/04 has not been examined by the original authority (as it was not claimed before him) and also by the Commissioner (Appeal) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
