1989 (8) TMI 237

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ora, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : G. Sankaran, Senior Vice-President]. - This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 55/85(C) dated 7-5-1985 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Madras. 2. We have heard Shri R.K. Lukose, Advocate with Shri S. Ignatius, Corporate Manager of the company, for the appellants and Shri M.S. Arora, DR, for the respondent-Collector. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dras and Arkonam. The appellants' claim for the exemption from duty in terms of Notification 201/79 and consequent refund of duty to be credited in their RG-23 account was dismissed by the lower authorities. 4. The question, therefore, is whether set-off of duty already paid on the inputs (falling under Item 68) used in the manufacture of masticated rubber would be available for payment of duty o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... orities even while conceding that the ratio of the previous decision would apply to the present case. 6. Having considered the submissions of both sides, we do not find any reason to depart from the previous decision of this Tribunal. In the result, we allow the appeal and remand the matter to the Assistant Collector to work out the relief due to the appellants as set out in the Tribunal's order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X