9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rential Rate) of the Tariff whereas Column No.4 in the notification refers to the Basic Customs Duty and Column No.5 refers to the Additional Duty of Customs. Simply because the column numbers are the same, the notes meant for the Tariff cannot be applied to the exemption notification. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/571/2009 - A/31628/2018 - Dated:- 20-12-2018 - Mr. M.V.Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. P. Venkata Subba Rao, Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Smt B.V. Siva Naga Kumari, Commissioner/AR For the Respondent : None ORDER PER: P.V. SUBBA RAO. 1. This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 30/2009 (H-II) CUS dated 30.06.2009. 2. None appeared for the respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal was passed accordingly. Aggrieved, the appellant appealed to the first appellate authority who allowed the appeal with the following remarks. I have also observed from the Final Order No.1112/2008 dated 01.09.2008 passed by the Hon ble Tribunal in the appeal C/372/2008 dated 26.09.2008 filed by M/s Standard Consultants Ltd, Hyderabad that in any entry of the above notification, if no rate of duty is shown in Column No.5, the rate show under Column No.4 shall be applicable. In the present case, the rate shown under Column No.4 is Nil and therefore, respectfully following the ratio of the above said decision of CESTAT-Bangalore, I hold the rate under Column No.5 shall be taken as Nil for Additional Duty of Customs. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder of the Tribunal-Bangalore in the case of Standard Consultants Ltd has been appealed against and is admitted by the Hon ble Supreme Court as reported at 2011 (263) ELT A15 (SC). Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that both interpretations of the notification are possible any benefit of doubt should go to the revenue and the exemption notification must be strictly construed against assessee as has been held by the Constitutional Bench of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai Vs M/s Dilip Kumar Co. [Civil Appeal No.3327 of 2007]. 5. We have considered the arguments and perused the records. The Commissioner (Appeals) has relied on the order of the CESTAT-Bangalore in the case of Standard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
