9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (6) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. A show cause-cum-demand notice dated 10-5-1988 was issued to the appellants herein for recovery of Central Excise Duty of Rs. 34,547.40 on envelopes falling under CET Sub-heading 4817.00 cleared without payment of duty for the period 1-3-1988 to 31-3-1988. The notice was withdrawn by the Assistant Collector vide Order No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 175/86 as the appellants were not entitled to exemption on envelopes under Notification 43/86. On remand, the Assistant Collector held that the benefit of the Notification 175/86 was not available to the appellants since the value of clearances was to include the clearance value of envelopes. He, therefore, confirmed the duty demand. The Collector (Appeals) vide the impugned order held that, s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to exemption on envelopes under Notification 43/86, in paragraphs 4 and 5 of his order. Therefore, the Collector (Appeals) in the present impugned order is correct in holding that he has no jurisdiction once again to go into the question of availability of benefit under the above mentioned notification. We, therefore, see no reason to interfere with the impugned order which is correct in law and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
