2007 (1) TMI 9

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2.The appellant filed these appeals against impugned order whereby demand was confirmed after denying the small scale exemption notification and penalties were imposed. 3.The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of CI castings, ingots, railway wagon components, D.E. parts, generating set, A.C. generator and diesel engine. The appellants were availing the benefit of small scale exemption Not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... small scale exemption notification was denied. 4.The contention of the appellant is that the duty was demanded after taking into consideration the value of clearance and benefit of cum-duty price was not allowed. The contention is that the appellants are entitled for the cum-duty price, in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. reported in 2002 (141 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y penal action. 6.I find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Foods overruled the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Faridabad Tools Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal in the case of Faridabad Tools (supra) held that a manufacturer can avail simultaneously the benefit of exemption notification and cleared the goods on payment of duty also, therefore, it cannot be said that the appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X