2007 (6) TMI 347

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant. Shri Satish Sundar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - This application filed by the Revenue (Appellant) is for stay of operation of the impugned order. After hearing ld. SDR for the applicant and ld. Counsel for the respondent, we are of the view that the appeal itself requires to be finally disposed of at this stage. Accordingly, after dismiss .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Notification to them. 3. In the present appeal, the Revenue seeks to distinguish the case of Shree Hari Chemicals Exports Ltd. v. UOI [2006 (193) E.L.T. 257 (S.C.)] as if the same was relied on by the lower appellate authority. It is submitted that, in the EDI system, it was incumbent on the importer to claim the benefit of any exemption Notification at the time of filing Bill of Entry. In this .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Appellate Commissioner. Did the appellant ever read the text of the impugned order? 5. As rightly pointed out by ld. Counsel, we have considered similar cases and have allowed the benefit of exemption Notification to importers notwithstanding the fact that such benefit had not been claimed at the time of clearance of the goods. The appellant has no case that, at the time of the subject impor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X