TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (10) TMI 193
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....manufactured and cleared by the applicant between March, 1993 to February, 1997 were liable to duty and not entitled to duty free clearance. The Commissioner has found that the beverages were classifiable not under Heading 20.01 of the Tariff as claimed by the assessee but under Heading 22.09. He has also held that the benefit of exemption Notification 103/90, and its successor 2/94 would not be available to the pulp based drinks cleared by the applicant. 3. We are unable to accept the contentions raised by the Advocate for the applicant that the classification under Heading 20.01 is correct. We have noted the extensive submissions made by him with regard to the classification of the goods under the Fruit Products Order (FPO), 1955. H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oceedings which were commenced simultaneously with this proceedings against the applicant on the ground that it wrongly took Modvat credit does not have the effect of the saying that the credit has been taken into account for payment of duty on the finished product. The credit was not taken because of no duty was paid on the finished products. If duty is bound to be payable the credit taken would be available for paying duty, and it has to be therefore taken into account in determining the duty effectively payable on these accounts is Rs. 47.57 lakhs and Rs. 1.06 crores. It is also not disputed bank guarantees have already been encashed for Rs. 66.93 lakhs. This reduces the total of duty prima facie payable to Rs. 2.21 crores. 5. &em....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led after the personal hearing before him on 28-3-1995. It is therefore prima facie, reasonable to hold these product to be pulp based drinks. The benefit of Notification 103/90; and later 2/94 would, prima facie, be available. 7. The departmental representative produce before us a letter dated 9-7-1999 of the Commissioner in response to our clarification regarding pulp based drinks. The contention therein that the question of availability of Notification 103/90 and 2/94 was not before the Commissioner was not correct. The notice may not have referred to it, but the applicant in its reply did claim it, and the Commissioner was bound to consider. It is settled law that a benefit of notification can be claimed and has to be granted at a....