TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 634X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. E/3334/2006-Ex(DB) - FINAL ORDER NO. 61415/2016 - Dated:- 21-9-2016 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Sh. R.K. Sharma, AR, for the appellant None, for the respondent PER: ASHOK JINDAL The Revenue is in appeal. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondent is e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of duty is required to use the same in their factory for further manufacture of their final product and was not allowed to be used for any other purpose outside the factory premises. The respondent had been filing and undertaking in their applications under Rule 4 of the Customs (IGCRDMEG) Rules, 1996 that they will use the imported goods at the concessional rate of duty in their factory premise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r was challenged by the respondent before the Ld. Commissioner (A). The Ld. Commissioner (A) after considering the submissions made by the respondent set aside the adjudication order. Aggrieved from the said order, the Revenue is before us. 3. Heard the Id. AR and considered the submission. 4. We examine the impugned order, in the impugned order the Ld. Commissioner (A) has observed as under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the goods has been the same i.e. in the manufacture of the colour picture tubes only. The above contention of the appellant seems to be quite correct and convincing in as much as the goods in question were diverted to their own unit by the appellant in Vadodra and were used in the final product i.e. Colour Picture Tubes, for which the said goods were imported. While diverting the goods in que ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d order of this Tribunal has been affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab Haryana reported in 2011 (267) ELT 41 (P H). 6. In view of the above decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in respondent own case of earlier period on identical issue which has been followed by the Ld. Commissioner (A) in the impugned order. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
