Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the earlier final order required rectification to correctly apply the exemption notifications governing the relevant periods for goods classified under heading 6803.
Analysis: The application pointed out that the earlier order had referred to Notification No. 08/96-C.E. even though the disputed periods were governed by later notifications. The order clarified that the duty demand had to be worked out by applying the notifications available during the relevant period. It further substituted the earlier paragraph to state that goods containing more than 25% by weight of red mud, press mud or blast furnace slag and falling under Chapter 68 were fully exempt only under Notification No. 08/96-C.E., while the exemption under Notification No. 5/97-C.E. was limited to 8% and under Notification No. 5/98-C.E. was restricted to goods falling under heading 6807.10.
Conclusion: The final order was rectified by substituting the earlier paragraph, and the Revenue's application was disposed of accordingly.
Ratio Decidendi: A rectification is warranted where the operative part of an order has misstated the applicable exemption notifications for the relevant period, and duty must be determined with reference to the notification regime in force during that period.