2018 (3) TMI 1119

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) Shri Advait Sethna, Advocate with Ms. Ritu Thakkar, Advocate, for Appellant Shri S.V. Nair, AC (AR), for Respondent Per: Archana Wadhwa Both the appeals are being disposed of by a common order as the facts are identical. 2. The appellant herein is a Scientific, Technical R&D Organization engaged in various research projects. They placed an order on M/s Electronics Corporation of I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nue intimated M/s Godrej & Boyce that the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai has taken the decision that their application for clearance of the goods in terms of the exemption notification was considered and found to be not eligible for the exemption. Such letter of the Range Superintendent was not specifically challenged by M/s Godrej & Boyce, who cleared the goods on payment of duty @ ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant fairly agrees that the said letter dated 28.10.2005 was not challenged before any higher appellate forum by M/s Godrej & Boyce. However, he draws our attention to the fact that when the above development was brought to their knowledge by M/s ECIL, they advised them to clear the goods on payment of duty under protest, inasmuch as the goods are req....