2002 (7) TMI 446

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Colour Picture Tubes. The appellants made an import of certain goods after claiming the benefit of Notification No. 36/96-Cus. (N.T.), dated 23 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tubes as the imported goods were for the manufacture of picture tubes. Therefore, the benefit of the notification is not available to the respondents. 5. The respondents submitted at the time of the import of the goods that they are entitled for the concessional rate of duty and the goods were damaged after clearances which is beyond the control of the respondents. The appellants also relied upo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... imported by the appellants after claiming the benefit of notification are not used in the manufacture of picture tubes, hence the benefit of notification is not available to the respondents. The respondents relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of National Organic Chemical Indus. Ltd. v. CC, (Import), Mumbai (supra) where while interpretating the notification No. 187/61-C.E., dated .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X