9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (12) TMI 344X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. This Bench of the Tribunal in its Miscellaneous Order No. 461/05, dated 19-9-2005, disposed of the ROM application filed by M/s. Tan India Ltd., in respect of the Final Order No. 1393/1996, dated 30-7-96, by recalling the same. In view of the above, the appeal filed by Revenue in respect of the order dated 31-1-93 has come before us for hearing. We are taking u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for emergency. The Revenue is aggrieved over the impugned order. According to Revenue, the respondents are not entitled for the benefit of the notification, in view of CEGAT s decision in the case of M/s. Venkateswara Cements Ltd. v. CCE, Final Order No. 994/96, dated 2-7-96, Revenue s appeal has no merits. In the case decided by the Tribunal, the relevant notification was No. 36/87-C.E., dated 1- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of CCE, Hyderabad v. M/s. Sunder Steels Ltd., wherein in the context of Notification No. 30/97-C.E., it was held that in the absence of restrictions the benefit cannot be denied on the ground that certain percentage of production is from the material purchased from outside. The ld. Advocate cited the decision of this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Alagappa Cements (P) Ltd. v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
