2013 (7) TMI 528

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant: Mr. S. Teli, Dy. Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent: Shri P.M. Dave, Adv. Order Per: B.S.V. Murthy The issue involved in this case is whether the goods manufactured by the appellants in their capacity as a vendors and cleared to another unit for supply to defence are eligible for exemption or not. Appellant availed the exemption and cleared the goods and subsequently afte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....th Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and in the light of written submissions and the submissions of the learned AR, the issue can be finally decided. Accordingly, we waive the requirement of pre-deposit and decide the appeal itself. 4. Heard the learned AR and considered the submissions in writing received from the respondent. Learned AR submits that in this case, the appellant avail....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e impugned order should be set aside and penalty restored. 5. We find that the Commissioner (A) has taken note of the fact that in the case of Sujan Industries vs. CCE, Mumbai: 2007 (220) E.L.T. 161 (Tri.-Mum.), a view had been taken that the goods manufactured by the vendors and cleared to a unit specifying the notification for supply to defence was eligible for the exemption and on this basis....