2000 (7) TMI 564

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng under sub-heading No. 8201.00. The benefit of the said notification was denied by the Revenue on the ground that the appellants have not placed any evidence showing that the said items have been used as agricultural or horticultural implements and no end use certificates was produced. On this basis demand of duty of Rs. 34,13,695.89 was confirmed against the appellants by the Asstt. Commissioner, Jamshedpur. However on an appeal against the above order the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal. The said order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is impugned before us. 2. We have heard Shri R.K. Roy, ld. JDR for the Revenue and Dr. Samir Chakraborty, ld. Adv. along with Shri Abhijit Biswas, ld. Adv. F....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rule 9B has not been followed. I also do not find that the final approval of classification list No. 49/93 have been received by appellants. Had there been final approval disallowing the exemption, a show cause notice should have been issued. I also find that the Asstt. Commissioner may have gone beyond her powers while adjudicating the case involving over Rs. 34 lakhs too under Sec. 11A. Since there is no end use criteria in the notification and these implements having been classified under 82.01 they are eligible for benefits of exemption Notfn. No. 11/88. The appeal is accordingly allowed with consequential relief." 4. It is seen that notification No. 111/88 grants exemption to the goods falling under chapter 82 and describing t....