9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1737X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hri K.M. D'Souza, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER Denial of duty exemption provided under Notification Nos. 58/2008-C.E., dated 7-10-2008 and 24/2010 dated 27-2-2010 is the subject matter of present dispute. Since common issue is involved in both these appeals, the same are taken up for hearing together and a common order is being passed. 2. Brief facts of the case a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification No. 20/2006-C.E., dated 1-3-2006 as amended by Notification No. 24/2010, dated 27-2-2010, whereunder Special Additional Duty (SAD) applicable to "goods required for medical, surgical, dental and veterinary use" was 'nil'. However, the said Bill of Entry was assessed, charging SAD @ 4%. The appellant also preferred appeal against the assessment of the Bill of Entry before the Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring for Revenue reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order and further submitted that since based on the declaration filed by the appellant, the Bills of Entry in question were assessed by the department, duty exemption claimed subsequently cannot be available and accordingly, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected the appeals filed by the appellant. 5. Heard bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding Notifications dated 7-10-2003 and 27-2-2010. The Assessing Officer at the time of assessment of the Bill of Entry had not extended the duty benefit provided under the said Notifications. Thus, in our considered view, the appellant had appropriately filed the appeal before the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) for extending the benefit provided under the said Notifications. The fact is not under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
