2018 (8) TMI 82

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Hasija, Supdt. (A.R) for respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra This is an appeal filed against Order-in-Appeal No. SB(52)52/MV/2010 dt. 20.05.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods and availed SSI exemption under Notification No. 9/2001 -CE dt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are eligible to the benefit of said notification and the value of clearances at Goa unit cannot be clubbed with that of Mumbai unit. He submits that even though the said judgment was placed before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), however it was not followed. 4. Ld. AR for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). He has fairly accepted that no appeal has been filed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 1.3.2000 is reproduced as under: "3. For the purpose of determining the aggregate value of clearances for home consumption, the following clearance shall not be taken into account namely:- (a) clearances, which are exempt from the whole of the excise duty leviable thereon (other than an exemption based on quantity or value of clearances) under any other notification or on which....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndent. In this case, the respondent at Mumbai unit though having not declared the existence of Goa unit cannot be deprived of the benefit of the Notification No. 9/2000, as it is undisputed that at Goa unit, the respondent has availed the benefit of Notification No. 9/2000, which exempt the goods manufactured in the rural area, be it branded or unbranded. This factual position is not disputed then....