TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (10) TMI 649
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r M.V. Ravindran : These two appeals are filed by the appellant against the Order-in-Appeal No. 287/2006-MCH/AC/Gr.2BI/06 dated 14.7.2006. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are whether the 'BOPP Film' imported by the appellant under chapter heading 3920.99 claiming benefit of Notification No. 25/99 dated 28.2.1999 has been correctly done so or otherwise. Assessment offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g on behalf of the appellant takes us through the entire order-in-original and impugned order and also draws our attention to entry No. 52 of Notification No. 25/99 dated 28.2.1999. He draws our attention to the appellant's own case in respect of the very same products in Appeal No. C/38/06 wherein it was held that the benefit of Notification No. 25/99 dated 28.2.1999 should not be denied to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ior to the explanation inserted in the said Notification No. 25/99 dated 28.2.1999. 5. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. It is undisputed that the appellant herein had imported 'BOPP Film' and were using the same for the manufacture of "electronic capacitor grade matellised dielectric plastic film". It is also undisputed that the benefit of r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notification would indicate that the explanation has been introduced to clarify the scope of the coverage of the exemption thereunder as was originally envisaged and would thus be retrospective in its application. 4. In this view of the matter, we would find force in the argument made before us that the subject films were always entitled to the benefit of notification and more so when we find th....