9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - 1. This appeal has been filed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 153/2005 Central Excise, dated 29-7-2005, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bangalore. 2. The appellants opted for the benefit of SSI exemption Notification No. 09/2002 for payment of duty at concessional rate. However when the audit party visited the unit, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants would not be entitled for the benefit of the said Notification. Therefore the appellants approached the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the order of the lower authority. Hence the appellants have come before this Tribunal for relief. 3. Shri M. S. Srinivasa, learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants and Ms. Sudha Koka, learned SDR for R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Notification for the entire year. The learned Advocate also pointed out that in term of the Notification No. 09/2002, there is only a provision for opting for the notification and once an option is exercised for availing the benefit of notification, then there is no question of opting out of the same, 5. The learned Departmental Representative reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... substantial benefit of the said Notification. In these circumstances, the insistence on payment of full rate of duty for the entire period is not correct. The appellant is entitled for refund since the differential duty was paid after the clearance. There is no question of unjust enrichment. In these circumstances, we allow the appeal with consequential relief. (Operative portion of the order ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
