1992 (2) TMI 235

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is appeal is directed against the impugned Order-in-Appeal passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras. 2. Shortly put, the facts of the case are that the respondents are manufacturer of rubber moulded components falling under erstwhile T.I. No. 68. They were availing exemption under Notification No. 77/85, dated 17-3-1985 as amended by Notification No. 118/85, dated 8-5-1985 for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty under Notification issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules are not to be taken into account in computing the clearance value as stated in Notification No. 77/85. Hence the present appeal by the Revenue. 3. When the case was called, the respondents instead of entering into appearance, have requested for a decision on merits in the light of the submissions made by them in writing. In th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... its, avoiding payment of duty by supplying the bulk of the specified goods in terms of Chapter X Procedure as OE equipment under Notification No. 167/79-C.E. On being pointed out by the Bench as to how the said apprehension can be taken into consideration while interpreting the Notification, he has nothing to add. 5. We have considered the submissions. The Collector (Appeals) has recorded findin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X