9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 89X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Heard the ld. A.R. for the Department. None present for the respondent. The Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No.18/Cus/BBSR I/06 dated 19.10.2006, whereby the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Order dated 28.6.2006 of the lower adjudicating authority. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent is an 100% EOU Unit engaged in the manufacture of gra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the respondent by holding that in case the respondent s letter dated 20.11.1999 is not readily available with the Department, there is no bar to obtain fresh application for remission of duty as the impugned goods were still lying in the factory premises and after issuance of order for remission of duty by the ld. Commissioner for remission of duty, the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Falta Special Economic Zone. The Assistant Commissioner granted provisional de-bonding. The respondent paid the duty of Rs.2,16,994/-. However, they are contesting the same on the ground that the goods are being damaged and they are not liable to pay duty. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the appeal of the respondent on the ground that if in case their application is not available with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned goods are still lying in the factory premises as claimed by the appellants. The duty paid under protest against AR-1 No.01/06-07 dated 26.06.2006 may be refunded to the appellants, if necessary claim is lodged by them in this respect. After issue of necessary order by the Commissioner for remittance of duty, the impugned goods can be destroyed duly observing necessary prescribed procedures ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
