9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bench The facts of the case are that the appellants had imported a consignment of silk fabrics in the month of March 2007 vide Bill of Entry dated 27.03.2007 and claimed benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004, in respect of additional duty of customs equal to excise duty chargeable on import ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. Advocate Shri Joseph Prabhakar, fairly informs that on identical issue which had been agitated before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CC (Exports), Chennai Vs. Prashray Overseas Pvt. Ltd. - 2016 (338) ELT 44 (Mad.), in which judgment, the issue has been held against the appellants. 3. We find it to be so. Para 59 and 60 of the said judgment are relevant in this regard and are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fabrics falling under Tariff Item No.5007, there are no inputs (used directly or indirectly and whether found in the final product or not), which attract any levy of duty under tariff items relevant to those inputs. 60. Hence, in fine, the propositions of law that would emerge out of the above discussion, can be summed up as follows : (i) In cases where the exemption Notifications are absolut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conditional, but also restrictive in nature, as they confer benefit not upon all manufacturers of exempted goods, even if they are domestic manufacturers, but only upon those, who use inputs that had suffered duty. (iii) In cases where the exemption Notification stipulates only one condition namely that no Cenvat credit ought to have been availed on the inputs, the benefit of the Notification w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
