2003 (12) TMI 540

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Vikas Kumar, SDR, for the Respondent.  [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. - These are four applications by M/s. Matsushita Lakhanpal Battery (I) Ltd. for waiver of pre-deposit of duty totalling Rs. 2,34,820/- and penalty of Rs. 17,000/-. 2. Shri Ashutosh Upadhyay, learned Advocate, submitted that the applicants manufacture primary cell....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dry battery cells and as such duty had been paid by them; that these components, in any case, had been used in the manufacture of dry battery cells, which are chargeable to duty and, therefore, it cannot be claimed that the condition of the Notification was not fulfilled. He, relied upon the decision in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. C.C.E., 2000 (124) E.L.T. 323 (T). 3.&em....