9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (7) TMI 218X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondents. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. The allegation against the respondents herein is that the respondents, who are manufacturers of goods falling under, T.I. 68 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff, obtained benzene under nil rate or concessional rate of duty under Notification 276/67 or 35/73 and sent it to another factory for conversion by esterification in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve been partially processed during the use in the industrial process to a place outside for carrying out any other operations necessary for the completion of the industrial process and returned thereafter to the same premises for further use in the industrial process. The case of the Department was based upon statements of the Chief Chemist of Payal Dyes and Chemicals at the relevant time and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts having been dropped by the adjudicating authority, the Dept. has preferred the above appeal. 3. We have heard Shri L.N. Murthy, learned DR for the appellants and Shri N.I. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents. 4. The learned DR takes us through the statements on various dates and the cross-examination of Mr. C.K. Gandhi, Chief Chemist of Payal Dyes and Chemicals and Mr. R.M. Bhatia, P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n notification cannot be denied to an assessee on the ground of procedural lapse, if the assessee was factually entitled to the benefit. The show cause notice does not contain any whisper of an allegation that the respondents did not receive back the benzene for utilisation in the production of the final product. It is also not the case of the Dept. that the benzene had been sold by the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
