1999 (2) TMI 207

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etal Val, Sr. Advocate, with F. Sorabjee, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Chatterjee, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - Application is for waiver of deposit of Rs. 5.04 crores approximately and penalty of Rs. 50 lakhs under Rule 173Q. 2. Advocate for the Applicant says that the applicant manufacture in its factory various intermediate produ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....othi Plastic Industries v. Collector - 1996 (83) E.L.T. 123; (v) Polychem Ltd. v. Collector - 1997 (90) E.L.T. 156; (vi) Jagatjit Industries Ltd. v. Collector - 1998 (99) E.L.T. 509. 3. He contends that the Collector's reliance on the observation of the Supreme Court in Kailashnath v. State of U.P. - AIR 1957 SC 790, to the effect that an exemption notification is to be read as part ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Supreme Court in paragraph 12 of its judgment that the notification issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules has statutory force and an exemption under notification is as if it were contained in the Act itself. He says that the earlier decisions require reconsideration. 5.  The decisions of the Tribunal cited by the learned Advocate for the applicant, all are of the view, that notw....