ELECTRICAL AND ALLIED Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) THE appellant filed this appeal against the order -in -appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby demand was confirmed after denying the benefit of Notification No. 38/97 -CE on the ground that the appellant had not complied with the conditions of the notification.

(3.) THE contention of the appellant is that Notification No. 38/97 -CE was issued on 27.6.97 and they filed necessary declaration for availing the benefit of Notification on 21.7.97 which was duly received in the office of Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise. In this letter they had given all the information such as name and address of the manufacturer, location of the factory, date of option and list of the commodities manufactured by them. In spite of this in the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the appellant had not complied with the conditions as laid down in the notification as all full particulars viz. name and address, location, description of goods, date of option etc. are not mentioned in the declaration. In these circumstances, the denial of benefit of notification on these grounds is not sustainable.