9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (5) TMI 224X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Srivastava, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. The appeals of M/s. Shah Ji Steels, M/s. Aswad Steels Alloys (P) Limited and M/s. Raman Ispat (P) Limited pertain to common issue holding that if the assessee has opted for availing concessional rate of duty under Rule 96ZO(3), he cannot claim concession of sub-section 4 of Section 3A. In the appeal of M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) R.L.T. 82]. It was submitted by them that this Tribunal held that if there was conflict between Rule 96ZO(3) and sub-section 4 of Section 3A, the provisions of sub-section 4 of Section 3A shall prevail. They submitted that their case was fully covered by the decision of this Tribunal and prayed that the pre-deposit of duty may be waived and the cases may be sent back to the original authority fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty and then the actual production for determination of the duty liability. He submits that no doubt the Commissioner examined the duty liability under Rule 96ZO(3). They also submit that Rule 96ZO(3) is wrong rule for the purpose of determining the production of capacity for actual redetermination of duty liability under sub-section 4 of Section 3A. 5. Heard the rival submissions. We find that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r remand. The appeals are, therefore remanded to the Commissioner concerned for examining the case under the provisions of sub-section 4 of Section 3A. In the mean time the appellants will furnish information for determination of the actual production for re-determining the duty liability. The appeals are, therefore allowed by way of remand after setting aside the impugned order and after dispensi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
