TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Communication Ltd. vs. CCE, Jaipur [2016 (7) TMI 863 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] wherein it was held that appellants are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 6/2006. Therefore, by following the same, we set-aside the impugned order. - Decided in favour of appellant with consequential relief - Excise Appeal No. 149 of 2009 - Final Order No. 52371/2016 - Dated:- 1-7-2016 - Archana Wadhwa (Judici ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of custom duty provided under Sl. No. 400 of the Notification No.21/2002 dated 01.03.2002 and inasmuch as the said sl. No. applies to goods classifiable under chapter 98.01 of the Customs tariff and for availing the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002 for goods of 98.01, requirements of Project Import Regulation, 1986 are to be satisfied, the benefit of the notification cannot be extended to w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le particularly when condition No. 86 of the Notification No. 21/2002, dated 1.3.2002 is fulfilled by them. Similar submissions were made by Revenue for denying the benefit of Notification No. 6/2006, dated 1.3.2006 on the ground of non-fulfilment of conditions of the Project Import Regulation in case of Sarita Steel and Industries Ltd. reported in 2011 (264) ELT 313 and Tribunal in that case allo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
