2008 (5) TMI 587

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Duty of Rs. 1,90,799/- stands confirmed against the appellant along with confirmation of interest and imposition of penalty of identical amount. 2. As per facts on record, appellant is engaged in the manufacture of P P medicines in their factory situated in rural industrial area. During the relevant period, they were availing th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... goods exceeded Rs. 3 crores. As such, Revenue denied them the benefit of the notification in the next financial year. 4. The appellant s submission is that the value of the branded goods cleared by them on payment of duty is not required to be taken into consideration while computing the total aggregate value of Rs.3 crores in a year for eligibility to the notification in the next financial yea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... king into consideration the aggregate value of the clearances in a particular year for eligibility to the notification in the next financial year, clearance of good bearing the brand name of another person, which are eligible for the grant of exemption under this notification in terms of paragraph 4 are not required to be taken into consideration. Inasmuch as the branded goods manufactured by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X