9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (10) TMI 298X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per : V.T. Raghavachari, Member (J)]. - The respondents M/s. Emkay Glass Works had leased out a part of their factory to another partnership concern by name Emkay Udyog under lease dated 15-6-1986. The issue in these two appeals relates to the liability for payment of duty on the goods claimed to have been manufactured by Emkay Udyog during the period 15-7-1980 to 31-8-1980 (Appeal No. 1095) a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ucts independently in that place. This was not granted and on the other hand proceedings were taken to demand duty from the respondents in respect of goods manufactured in the leased premises. The Department felt that as the respondents had exceeded the limit of fifteen laths they had created Emkay Udyog on paper in order to claim a further exemption. If the Department was to prove this claim it s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ritten by the Superintendent on 21-1-1981 and of which the Collector (Appeals) had not taken notice. The respondents contended that no such letter was disclosed to them and, therefore, no reliance should be placed on the contents of the said letter. The said letter states that the production of Emkay Udyog has been taken into the records of the respondents who have paid duty thereon also. In const ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
