1994 (3) TMI 223

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r, Vice President]. This is an appeal by the department against order of Collector (Appeals), Delhi dated 29-12-1989. 2. It is observed from the records that Notice of Hearing was issued by the Registry on 16-2-1994. But no one has appeared on behalf of the Respondent. 3. Ld. DR stated that in this case, the Respondents availed of money credit benefit without filing the proper procedure .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o cited the case of Tata Oil v. Collector of Customs reported in 1990 (48) E.L.T. 279 (Tri.) in support of his contentions. 6. We observe that the learned DR is correct that Rule 57(O) prescribes the procedure to be observed by the manufacturers for availing the benefit of money credit claim and therefore, in the normal course, the assessee was required to follow the same. However, at the same t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stead he preferred to take the precaution of asking the Superintendent to verify the facts before approval (and wisely so). Learned DR has not been able to show even at this stage as to whether the Superintendent had reported any fact which would disentitle the respondents from the benefit of the claim. No copy of the classification list has been filed before us. Learned DR has also not able to sh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X