2004 (8) TMI 440

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J) (Oral)]. The authorities below have demanded duty of Rs. 2,90,193/- from the appellants for the period 10-12-1996 to 31-3-1997 by denying the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E., dated 28-2-1993 (as amended). A penalty of Rs. 2,000/- has also been imposed on the assessee. Moving the application for waiver of pre-deposit an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lants exceeded, the limit prescribed under the Notification and consequently the demand of duty happened to be raised. We find that in the cited case of Ganesh Agro Pack (supra), this Tribunal disapproved a similar exercise of the department under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. The lower appellate authority has made an attempt to distinguish the cited case from the instant one by reading Para 2 of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X