Posted On by &filed under Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi, Tribunal.

Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Delhi
Pradhan Engg. Works vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 8 November, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2001 (127) ELT 867 Tri Del


P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order in appeal dated 27-12-1993 passed by the Collector (Appeals) vide which he had affirmed the Order-in-Original dated 9-3-1993 deriving the benefit of Notification No. 166/86 dated 1-3-1986 as amended by Notification No. 75/90 dated 20-3-1990 to them in respect of their product ‘foot valves’.

2. Ld. Counsel for the appellants has not contested the correctness of the impugned order so far it relates to the excisability of the product in question (foot valves) and the non-availability of benefit of Notification No. 166/86 to the appellants in respect thereof. Ld. Counsel has only stated that direction should be given to the adjudicating authority that availability of the benefit of SSI exemption Notification No. 175/86 to the appellants should be considered, while quantifying the duty demand, in accordance with the law, as they are small scale unit.

3. Ld. SDR has got no objection if such a direction is given to the adjudicating authority.

4. Since the impugned order of the Collector (Appeals) has not been challenged before us on merits, the same is ordered to be affirmed and accordingly the appeal of the appellants stands dismissed. However as requested by the Counsel, the adjudicating authority is directed to consider the availability of benefit of the Small Scale Exemption Notification No. 175/86 dated 1-3-1986, to the appellants in accordance with law, while quantifying the duty amount after hearing them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

107 queries in 0.195 seconds.