1999 (8) TMI 353

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)].-  This appeal arises from the Order in-Original No. 44/91, dated 13-5-1991 passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise confirming duty demand of Rs. 1,42,333.93 under Rule 9(2) of the CE Rules read with Section 11A besides imposing penalty of Rs. 2,000/- on the appellants in terms of Rule 9(2), 173Q and 226 of the C.E....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cedure outlined under Chapter X, they are not entitled to the benefit. He has also held that there was suppression of fact, mis-statement and non following of the rules and hence he invoked the provisions of Section 11A for demand of duty. 3. The Chartered Accountant appearing for the appellants submits that the benefit of exemption Notification cannot be denied to the appellants on the so....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in the case of Agrico Engg. Works v. CCE as reported in 1994 (72) E.L.T. 689 are no longer relevant in view of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. as reported in 1996 (87) E.L.T. 582. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further clarified that the benefit of exemption notification is available and the concession should be granted in case the intended use of material can be establi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellants had not followed the Chapter X procedure and on that ground the benefit of the Notification has been denied. We find that the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra (supra) which in turn relied upon a large number of judgments including the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Thermex Pvt. Ltd. (supra) which in effect over ruled the earlier judgment on this point in favour of....