TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... threshold limit. Same is the case in respect of the period 1.4.2004 to 8.7.2004. If the entire clearance during the period in question is less than the threshold limit, there cannot be any duty liability on the appellant as has been held by the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Kanpur vs. A.K. Chemicals (P) Ltd.[2010 (8) TMI 343 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI], wherein it was held that if intermittently central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and perused the records. 3. On perusal of the records, we find that the issue that falls for consideration in these appeals is whether the appellant is required to discharge the differential central excise duty demanded and confirmed by the lower authorities. The appellant had claimed the benefit of Small Scale Industries Exemption Notification No.34/2003 as amended by Notification No.47/200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eriod 1.4.2004 to 8.7.2004. If the entire clearance during the period in question is less than the threshold limit, there cannot be any duty liability on the appellant as has been held by the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Kanpur vs. A.K. Chemicals (P) Ltd. reported in 2011 (263) ELT 97, wherein it was held that if intermittently central excise duty is paid, it would not amount to the fact that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
