2014 (1) TMI 475

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ER Heard both sides. Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby Commissioner (Appeals) held that respondents are entitled for benefit of Notification No. 174/66, dated 24-9-1966. The contention of Revenue is that Commissioner (Appeals) after relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ech Jay Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India reported in 2004 (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al use. It is also condition of the Notification that benefit of Notification is not available in case at the time of re-import, the ownership has been changed from the family of exporter. The reading of above conditions shows that the Notification provides exemption to repaired goods which were re-imported goods into India by individuals. Hence the impugned order is not sustainable. 3. Ld. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fication No. 174/66 in a similar situation. 4. In the present case, the respondents which is NTPC has re-imported cabling of gas turbine after repair and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 174/66-Cus. For ready reference the relevant provisions of Notification are re-produced below : Limitations and Conditions "Provided the proper officer of Customs is satisfied :- (1)  &nb....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....from the family of exporter. Such conditions clearly leads to the conclusion that the Notification is for individuals only. We have gone through the Notification No. 80/70 which was before the Hon'ble High Court and the Tribunal in the decisions, relied upon by the respondent. There was no such condition as in Clauses-3 & 4 in the present Notification No. 174/66, therefore, the ratio of the above ....