9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 646X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order per : M. Veeraiyan, Member (T)]. Heard both sides on the stay petition. 2. The applicant has one unit in Lalru at Panjab where they are manufacturing HID Lamps both branded and unbranded and they were paying duty on the clearances of branded goods and availing the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-C.E., dated 1-3-2003 for the clearances of unbra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... need not be included for the purpose of considering the eligibility limit of Rs. 4.00 crores for extending benefit under Notification No. 8/03 for the year 2006-07 and 2007-08. Alternatively he also submits that they were under the bona fide belief that the manufacture of branded goods in the Baddi Unit having been fully exempted on the basis of area based exemption, they need not disclose the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f determining such limit. Clause 3A does not envisage exclusion of value of clearances which are exempted by a Notification like 50/03. 6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions of both sides. On a careful reading of the Notification, we find that the method for determining the exemption limit of Rs. 1.00 crore and the Rs. 4.00 crore limit for eligibility are, prima facie, different. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
