2003 (6) 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

.... Shri S. Bhatnagar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal dated 25-10-2002 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed the order-in-original confirming the duty demand of Rs. 7,19,807/- with penalty of Rs. 40,000/-. 2.  The issue involved in the present appeal is availability of the benefit of Not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....able goods of the appellants was Rs. 2,31,43,188/- which was much below the value prescribed limit of Rs. 300 lakhs. They being entitled to the benefit of Notification 9/99, dated 28-2-99, filed declaration w.e.f. 1-4-99, the date from which the above said Notification was made effective, under Rule 173B of the Rules. The benefit of this Notification has been denied to them on the ground that thei....