2014 (6) TMI 485

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for Revenue and Shri Udit Jain, ld. Advocate for the respondent - assessee. 2. Revenue has preferred this appeal against the order dated 9.7.2001 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Jaipur II. The respondent/assessee had preferred an appeal against the adjudication order dated 8.11.2000, whereby the Joint Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur II, ordered recovery of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct, 1944. 3. That appeal was partly allowed by the appellate Commissioner, following the judgment of this Tribunal in an appeal preferred by another similarly situated assessee - M/s Euro Cotspin Ltd.; reported in 2001 (127) ELT 52 (Tri-Del.). The Euro Cotspin judgment concluded that even in a case of clandestine removal, the benefit of exemption Notification No.2/95-CE must be granted. Following....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on the said yarn as mentioned in the show cause notice dated 16.12.1999. The appellate Commissioner also held that since penalty equivalent to duty amount was imposed, penalty of Rs.25,000/- imposed under Rules 9(2), 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and the penalty of Rs.20,000/- imposed under Section 112 of the Custom Act, 1962, is set aside. 4. By a separate order today we have dismissed ....