9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 700X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent. ORDER The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows : The appellant is a 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture of polyester texturised/twisted yarn falling under Chapter 54 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On scrutiny of records for the period from April, 2002 to May, 2002, it was noticed that the unit had cleared polyester textured yarn valued at Rs. 32,00,357/- to the holders o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hence, a Show Cause Notice was issued to them. 2. During the course of adjudication, the appellant raised various pleas and contentions as regards availability of exemption in terms of Notification No. 28/2001-C.E., dated 16-5-2001. In the alternative, they claimed the benefit of Notification No. 125/84-C.E., dated 26-5-1984 in terms of which all excisable goods produced or manufactured by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order, the Commissioner (Appeals) did not accept the appellant's alternative claim of exemption under Notification No. 125/84-C.E., dated 26-5-1984. He, accordingly, upheld the impugned order. Hence, the present appeal. 5. Ld. Advocate Shri Prakash Shah, appearing for the appellant submits that the observations of original adjudicating authority that Notification No. 125/84-C.E., dated 26-5- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to DFRC holders are considered to be as deemed export as per EXIM Policy and the same are not covered by the permission given for DTA sales and as such have to be treated as "goods not allowed to be sold in India". Consequently, all the decisions have held that such clearances attract exemption in terms of Notification No. 125/84-C.E., dated 26-5-1984. As such, without examining the legal issue a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
