9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 439X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mber (T)]. The issue involved in this appeal filed by the Revenue is whether the Respondents can clear the goods affixed with the brand name of another person on payment of duty and the goods affixed with their own brand name without payment of duty simultaneously. 2. Shri Ashok Kumar, ld. D.R. submitted, that as per the scheme of Notification No. 1/93-C.E., dated 28-2-1993 the assessee is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the brand name of other person are not specified goods as the exemption contained in Notification 1/93 is not applicable to such goods. He relied upon the decision in the case of Jaina Detergent P. Ltd. v. CCE, Allahabad, 1999 (113) E.L.T. 613 (Tribunal) = 1999 (32) RLT 256 (CEGAT). 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The Commissioner (Appeal) has specifically given his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch clearances the Respondents cannot be compelled to clear the goods eligible for exemption also on the payment of duty. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected. We, however, would like to make it clear that no Modvat credit will be available to the Respondents on the goods which are used in or in relation to the manufacture of the exempted goods. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
