1996 (5) TMI 149

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sanjeev Sachdeva, S.D.R., for the Respondent. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. -  This appeal is directed against the finding of the Collector (Appeals) holding that the benefit of Clause 3(i) of Notification No. 257/76, dated 30th September, 1976 was not available to the appellants as the factory was not in existence for the preceding five years. 2.  Shri Rohit Tandon, A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that for the purpose of Clause 4 of the notification cited supra the determination for arriving at the average shall be the number of years during which the factory actually worked. 3. Ld. Counsel submitted that it is evident from the Order-in-Original that the production during the year 1976-77 was of the order of 2,22,491 quintals and that the production during the year 1973-74 was nil;....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssue was whether the appellants qualify Clause 4 of the notification which requires that the production during the year 1976-77 should be more than the average production for the years 1974-75 and 1975-76. 6. On perusal of the figures given in the Order-in-Original we find that the production during the year 1976-77 was of the order of 2,22,491 quintals whereas the average production durin....