9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 593X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. The Revenue has filed the present appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 359/2003, dated 27-8-2003 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has extended the benefit of Notification No. 6/2000-C.E., Sr. No. 242 to the Respondents M/s. Arvind Chemicals Ltd. 2. Shri Virag Gupta, learned D.R., submitted that the Respondents manufacture mattresses of coir, P.U. foam, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 3-3-2001 issued to them for denying the SSI exemption; that the Asstt. Commissioner had not discussed about the Notification No. 6/2000 as the Respondents had neither filed any request letter nor filed any revised classification list for allowing the exemption under Notification No. 6/2000; that therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in extending the benefit of the said notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the show cause notice as well as proceedings before the departmental authorities was limited strictly to the value of the goods cleared to the DTA as it is not in dispute that in answer to the show cause notice the respondents could have raised the issue with regard to rate and calculation of the duty as well as the value of the goods in question. 4. We have considered the submissions of both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l exemption benefits of Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. Once the Respondents had pointed out to the Adjudicating Authority that the product manufactured by them is otherwise attracting nil rate of duty it was required of him to discuss the said notification. We also observe that the Commissioner (Appeals) has also mentioned in the impugned Order that the Adjudicating Authority has allowed the benefi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
