9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... REME COURT] and, therefore, the same deserves to be set aside. It was held in the said case that well settled law is that in case the applicant is entitled to benefit under two different Notifications or under two different Heads, he can claim more benefit and it is the duty of the authorities to grant such benefits if the applicant is otherwise entitled to such benefit. Appeal allowed. - HON BLE MR. P. DINESHA , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) And HON BLE MR. VASA SESHAGIRI RAO , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) Shri Gokulraj L. , Advocate for the Appellant Shri R. Rajaraman , Assistant Commissioner for the Respondent ORDER Order : [ Per Hon ble Mr. P. Dinesha ] This appeal is filed by the assessee against the Order-in-Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs.6,28,012/- though no such duty was leviable by virtue of the Notifications cited supra. 5.3 It appears that the appellant requested for re-assessment, but however, no re-assessment having been made and in order to save limitation, it appears that the appellant filed its appeal before the first appellate authority seeking relief. 5.4 After hearing the appellant, the first appellate authority has, vide impugned order, rejected the claim of the appellant by holding that: - (i) The appellant was obliged to comply with the procedures provided in the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. (ii) The appellant has claimed that Notification No. 24/2005 ibid. is an uncondit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .. .. 15 8523 (a) All prepared unrecorded media for sound recording or similar recording of other phenomena, other than cards incorporating a magnetic stripe (b) Recorded media for reproducing phenomena other than sound or image 6.3 We also find from the said Notification that Sl. No. 39 of the same reads as given below: - Sr. No. Heading, subheading or tariff item Description 1 2 3 . .. .. 39 All chapters All g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und which weighed with the Deputy Director General (Medical), DGHS for non-considering the prayer of the appellant was that earlier, exemption was sought under category 2 of exemption notification, not under category 3 of exemption notification and exemption under category 2 was withdrawn. This is hardly a ground sustainable in law. On the contrary, well settled law is that in case the applicant is entitled to benefit under two different Notifications or under two different Heads, he can claim more benefit and it is the duty of the authorities to grant such benefits if the applicant is otherwise entitled to such benefit. Therefore, non-consideration on the part of the Deputy Director General (Medical), DGHS to the prayer of the appellant in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
