1997 (2) TMI 267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Jangir Singh, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. -  The facts of the case leading to the present appeal are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of P.V.C. Compounds. They filed a C/List effective from 1-4-1993 claiming the benefit of Notification No. 14/92-C.E., dated 1-3-1992 and the assessment of their goods at 35% ad valorem. The Asstt. Col....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 14/92-C.E., dated 1-3-1992. The ld. Counsel submits that a perusal of this notification will show that serial number 2 and 3 of the Table annexed to the notification read as under :-                                    &nb....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and requires the assessee to pay duty at 35% ad valorem, serial number 3 is conditional and requires the assessee to pay at nil rate of duty. The ld. Counsel submits that the appellants had claimed benefit under this notification which was applicable in respect of the goods manufactured and cleared by them. He submits that there was no question of any option whatsoever. Alternatively, the ld. Coun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vant C/List effective from 1-4-1993, the appellants had already claimed under the column `No. & Date of the relevant notification, if any, issued having bearing on the rate of duty' "Notification No. 14/9 2-C.E., dated 1-3-1992 as amended" and in the column `rate of duty', they had claimed basic duty as 35%. There is no dispute that this Notification was not applicable to the goods manufactured by....