2020 (4) TMI 248

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e   Shri C. Mallikarjun Reddy, Authorized Representative for the appellant.   Shri C. Sumanth, Chartered Accountant for the respondent.   [Order per: ASHOK JINDAL]   1. Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002- CUS (Sl.No.217) dt.01.03.2002 to the respondent and dro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....002. Therefore, the proceedings were initiated against the respondent. The benefit of the exemption notification was denied and consequently, the demands were raised against the respondent. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) classified the impugned goods under CTH 2710 1990 of Custom Tariff Act, 1975 and allowed the benefit of exemption notification No. 21/2002-CUS dt.01.03.2002 and dropped the procee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s integra.   4. Heard both sides and perused the records.   5. On perusal of records, we find that initially the issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of CGG Marine vs Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Visakhapatnam in appeal C/91/2007 and this tribunal vide Final Order No.A/30472/2016 dt.16.05.2016 has examined the issue in detail and observed as follows:   ....