2006 (1) TMI 345

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h Havanur, SDR, for the Revenue. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. -  By this appeal, the appellant is challenging the correctness of the Order-in-Appeal No. 132/2003, dated 26-8-2003 passed by the Commissioner (A), Mumbai-II holding that the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of the Notification No. 17/01-Cus., dated 1-3-2001 on the ground that the contract has been awarded f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....was a 'person' for purpose of Condition 38 of Notification No. 17/2001-Cus., which has also held that the benefit cannot be denied by placing interpretation, which would defeat the purpose of granting the benefit of Notification. He submits that this judgment clearly applies to the facts of the case. 3. On a careful consideration, we notice that the appellant is required to be considered a....