https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327030 The court found the appeals maintainable under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act as the controversy did not pertain to the rate of duty or value of goods but centered on whether clearances exceeded the exemption limit. The Tribunal's decision to grant the respondent the benefit of the exemption notification was upheld due to lack of evidence supporting allegations of clandestine clearances. The court rejected the appellant's claim to club clearances from two units, Vadu and Jambusar, as exceeding the exemption limit when considered separately. The appeals were deemed maintainable, and the matter was set for further hearing. en-us Thu, 10 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Nov 2016 12:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327030 The court found the appeals maintainable under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act as the controversy did not pertain to the rate of duty or value of goods but centered on whether clearances exceeded the exemption limit. The Tribunal's decision to grant the respondent the benefit of the exemption notification was upheld due to lack of evidence supporting allegations of clandestine clearances. The court rejected the appellant's claim to club clearances from two units, Vadu and Jambusar, as exceeding the exemption limit when considered separately. The appeals were deemed maintainable, and the matter was set for further hearing. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327030