9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. Duty demand of Rs. 14,92,530/- has been confirmed against the appellants herein who are engaged in the manufacture of synthetic rubber aprons classified under CET sub-heading 4016.99, as a result of denial of benefit of concessional rate of duty claimed by them in terms of Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-86 as amended by N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is the criterion for determination of the eligibility to the benefit under the notification and the chargeability of the goods to any duty or the non-availment of the benefit by the brand name holder is not material for this purpose. The alternative submission is that the identical goods manufactured by the brand name holder were classified under CET sub-heading 4009.99 carrying Nil rate of duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learances of excisable goods for home consumption does not exceed the ceiling limit prescribed thereunder. The notification also provides that the exemption shall be applicable only to a factory which is an undertaking registered with the Director of Industries in any State or the Development Commissioner (SSI) as SSI unit under the provisions of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eria of being SSI unit and criteria of value of clearances, it was eligible to the benefit of the notification and in turn, the appellants who were clearing excisable goods with the brand name of M/s. Zaverchand Gaekwad Ltd. were eligible to the benefit of the notification. In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Ess Bee Industries Ors. [2001 (130) E.L.T. 203 (T) = 2001 (42) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the same or not and what is relevant for determining eligibility is value of clearance, registration as SSI unit and that the benefit is claimed for specified goods. 5. The ratio of the above decisions are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Following the ratio thereof, we hold that the non-availment of the benefit of exemption by the brand name holder cannot debar the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
