9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n denying benefit of the Notification No. 6/2002. Penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules - Held that:- The appellant has given advance intimation to the jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise before the clearance of the EOT cranes by claiming the benefit of Notification No. 6/2002 and also produced a certificate issued by the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities, Faizab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laiming the benefit of NotificationNo.6/2002 dated 1.3.2002, Sr. No. 237. 4. Show-cause notice was issued demanding duty after denying the benefit of Notification No. 6/2002 on the ground that the Notification provides exemption to items falling under any Chapter mainly non-conventional device/system specified under list-9 of the Notification. The list-9 at Sr. No. 237 of the Notification includ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view of this, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order, therefore, benefit of the Notification No. 6/2002 is denied. 7. The appellant is also challenging the imposition of penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules on the ground that the applicant was not committed any breach or contravention of any rule to attract the penalty. The appellant has given advance intimation to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... EOT cranes without payment of duty by claiming the benefit of Notification No. 6/2002. As all the facts were disclosed to the Revenue and necessary certificate was also produce, therefore, we find merit in the contention of the appellant that is not a case of imposition of any penalty. 9. In view of the above, the penalty imposed is set aside, otherwise the impugned order is upheld. (Dictated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
