9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant. Shri N. Pathak, AR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - After hearing both sides, we find that duty of Rs. 1,56,58,132/- stands confirmed against the applicant/appellant in respect of billets cleared by them during the period May '08 to March '09 to three parties M/s. Shri Bajrang Alloys Ltd., M/s. Shri Bajarang Metallics & Power Ltd. and M/s. J.J. Re-Rollers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne of the buyer of the appellant for cancellation of letter. The adjudicating authority in those cases, held against the assessee, by observing that the clearances to SEZ cannot be equated to export. On appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), he held in favour of the assessee. The Revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal. It is seen that while dealing with the Revenue's appeal in one of the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly." 3. As is seen from the above, it stands concluded that the supply of goods to SEZ has to be equated with export. As such, we find that the issue stands settled at the appellant's buyer's end. If that be so, the benefit available in terms of Rule 19(2) read with Notification is to be upheld. 4. Apart from the above, we find that the same Commissioner in the case of Shri Bajrang Met ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
