9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1794X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ree Flavours Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi-IV reported in [2014 (4) TMI 417 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], wherein by taking note of the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kaipan Pan Masala Pvt. Ltd. [2013 (1) TMI 356 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI], it was held that non-deposit of the duty and subsequent non-claiming of the abatement in violation of the procedure prescribed under the said Rules would not resu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l the packing machines installed in their factory were sealed from 16.07.2012 to 31.07.2012. The same were desealed with effect from 1.8.2012 and the appellants started manufacturing their final products from the next day. They subsequently claimed abatement for the period of closure. 3. The Revenue by entertaining a view that the appellant should have first deposited the duty for the entire mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng of the abatement in violation of the procedure prescribed under the said Rules would not result in denial of substantive benefit to the appellant and the only consequence would be confirmation of interest. 5. Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that they had already deposited the interest for the period of abatement. 6. Inasmuch as the issue is decided, we deem it fit to disp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
