9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 355X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. In this appeal the issue relates to the availability of benefit of exemption Notification No. 450/86-C.E. dated 17-11-1986 on S.S. hot patti/patta falling under sub-heading 7220.10 of the Tariff manufactured from S.S. Flats, to the appellants. The appellants claimed benefit of this notification in their classification lists effective from 25-7-1991 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Collector (Appeals) before the Tribunal. 3. The learned counsel for the appellants has contended that since the ingots out of which S.S. flats used as inputs for the manufacture of patti/patta were duty paid, the benefit of exemption Notification No. 450/86-CE could not be denied to the appellants, therefore, the impugned order of the Collector (Appeals) deserves to be set aside. 4. On the ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rove that he had not taken credit of duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of patti/patta. In other words, he must establish that the inputs used by him for the manufacture of the patti/patta were duty paid and no credit of the duty so paid, had been taken by him under Rule 56A or Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, before he can ask for the benefit of this notification. 6. In the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sfied the condition laid down in this notification for claiming nil rate of duty on patti/patta, the appellants had been rightly denied the benefit of the same. The impugned order of the Collector (Appeals) confirming the order-in-original of the Assistant Collector is, therefore, perfectly valid and does not suffer from any legal infirmity. 7. No doubt, Notification No. 450/86 had been amended ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
