[ad_1]
(per the Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)
Heard Mr. G. Mohan Rao, learned counsel for the appellant, and
Mrs. Pravalika, learned counsel, representing Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned
Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC for the respondent.
2. The instant is an appeal filed by the appellant / assessee under Section
35(G) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as substituted by the Finance Act, 2003
challenging the order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate
Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Bangalore (in short, the ‘CESTAT’) in
Appeal/Misc.No.E/666/2002, decided on 22.03.2002.
3. Vide the impugned order, the CESTAT dismissed the appeal filed by the
appellant holding that the intermediate product PMCA is not entitled for the
benefit of Notification No.67/95-CE when the final product
‘PYRAZYNAMIDE’ is exempted, in spite of the fact that the product is cleared
on payment of 8% amount in terms of Rule 57CC of the Central Excise Rules,
1944.
[ad_2]
Source link