2018 (8) TMI 1666

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(Technical) And Shri P. Dinesha, Member (Judicial) Shri Muthu Venkataraman, Advocate for the Appellant Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) for the Respondent E/ROM/41973/2017, E/MISC (CT)/40195/2018 in E/271/2009, E/ROM/41974/2017 in E/289/2009, E/ROM/41975/2017 in E/241/2010, E/ROM/41978/2017 in E/250/2010, E/ROM/41976/2017, E/MISC (CT)/40196/2018 in E/395/2010, E/ROM/41979/2017 in E/442/2010, E....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... normal period. He pointed out that the tariff rate for the above CETH was 'nil' during the entire period of dispute and hence the appellant will not be liable to pay any duty irrespective of the benefit of the Notification No. 23/2003-CE. Accordingly, he submitted that the findings of the Tribunal upholding the demand for differential duty for the period under dispute may be modified. 3.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....le in view of violation of condition No. 3 (i) of the notification as discussed. Demand for differential duty, if any, will be applicable only for normal period." In the result ROM applications are allowed as above. 5. The miscellaneous applications for change of cause title have been filed by the Revenue due to change in the jurisdiction of the appellant and change in address of the respondent.....