1983 (2) TMI 160

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Stevedoring charges of Rs. 30/- per MT were made at a flat rate. The appellant felt aggrieved and represented that the rate was on a mugh higher side. The claim of the appellant was rejected by the Assistant Collector on the ground that details supported by the documents have not been furnished. The Assistant Collector had demanded the break-up of the charges. 2. The appellant felt aggrieved an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Assistant Collector as well as to the Appellate Collector. 4. We also observe from the records that the assessing officer had made an ad hoc addition at the rate of Rs. 30/- per MT towards stevedoring charges, even though the appellant had declared the actual amount incurred as stevedoring charges. We are not satisfied about the basis of this rate. Since the Appellants are in a position now to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X