9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1092X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mar, A.R. for the Appellant-Revenue(s) Shri Surjit Bhadu, Shri Veer Singh, Advocates for the Respondent(s) Per : Ashok Jindal Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein both the lower authorities have granted benefit of exemption of Notification No. 1/10 CE dated 06.02.2010 for substantial expansion done by the respondent. 2. The facts of the case are that, the respondent is lo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... employment of more than 25% of employees. We have gone through the notification. For better appreciation, clause 8 of the said notification is reproduced hereunder:- "8 The exemption contained in this notification shall apply only to the following kind of units, namely:- (a) New Industrial units which commence commercial production on or after the 6th day of February, 2010; (b) Industrial u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d below one hundred and twenty-five per cent. of the base employment limit, such industrial unit shall be debarred from claiming the exemption contained in this notification in future: Provided that, the exemption availed by such industrial unit, prior to such reduction, shall not be recoverable from such industrial unit. (2) the manufacturer shall produce a certificate, from General Manager o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se 8 (b) (ii) of the notification. Therefore, the respondent has rightly claimed the substantial expansion in terms of Notification No. 1/2010-CE dated 06.02.2010. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order and the same is upheld. In result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
(Order dictated and pronounced in the court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
