9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of goods to UNICEF by the appellant's 100% EOU on the ground that this Notification is not extended to the 100% EOU and the same is applicable only to DTA Unit. 2. Shri Sandeep R. Chotia, Accounts Manager of the appellant company appeared and submitted that in their own case the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal No. KRS/2011/VAPI/2009 dated 01.09.2009 held that even if the appellant is not entitled for Exemption Notification No. 108/95-CE dated 28.08.1995 but for calculating the excise duty of 100% EOU a Notification No. 84/97-Cus dated 11.11.1997 has to be considered and accordingly, the appellant will get the exemption. He submits that this case may be decided as per the Commissioner (Appeals) order. 3. Shri P. Tripathi, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -CE dt. 28.08.95. The adj. authority has confirmed the demand on the ground that the appellants were required to pay excise duty in this case as the said notification did not extend the benefit of the same to 100% EOU. The appellants on the other hand have mainly submitted that in view of proviso to Section 3(1), they are required to pay aggregate of duties of customs and while calculating duties of customs, benefit of exemption notification No. 84/97-Cus dt. 11.11.97 is available to them. They have relied upon the case laws of Ratangiri Textiles Ltd- 2003(161) ELT 975. Lucky Star International-2001(134) ELT 26 (Guj) and Handum Industries Ltd-2006(197)ELT 208. 6.1/- I have perused the said case laws and other case laws on the subject mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... World Bank/ Asian Development Bank as nil. Similar view have been expressed by Tribunal in the case of General Optics(Asia) Ltd- 2004(175) ELT 381.Therefore following the ratio of the above case laws, the impugned order is not sustainable." Though the above decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not binding on us, however, the same has a strong persuasive value. On merit of the case, we are completely convinced with the reasoning given by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and the said order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the appellant's own case appears to have been accepted by the department as there is no record that the said order has been challenged. Moreover, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon on the exact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
