9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1011X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the benefit of the notification at the time of filing Bills of Entry - The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Share Medical Care vs. UOI [2007 (2) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], has observed that even if the claim of benefit under a particular notification is not made at the initial stage, the assessee cannot be estopped from claiming such benefit at a later stage - appeal allowed - decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion in the case of Priyesh Chemicals Metals vs. CCE, Bangalore reported as 2000 (120) ELT 259 (Tribunal LB) and accordingly held against the appellant vide impugned orders. Hence, the present appeals. 2. The said issue has been considered by the Tribunal in the appellant s own case and vide Final Order No. C/A/55993-56023/2016-CU[DB] dated 17.11.2016, it was observed as under: 5 . Aft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the importers were entitled to exemption from payment of CVD in terms of Notification No. 6/2002-CE. In as much as the dispute in the present appeal is in respect of the identical conditions, as contained in the subsequent Notification No. 30/2004-CE, the ratio of law as declared by the Hon ble Supreme Court is fully applicable to the facts of the present case. Accordingly, we set aside the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
