9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (3) TMI 241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . This is a department appeal against the order of Collector (A), Madras dated 16-1-1987. 2. Ld. DR drew attention to the order of Collector (A) and the grounds of appeal mentioned in the appeal memo filed by the department. 3. He further stated that the respondents were manufacturers of tractors. They had obtained certain tractor parts under notification 167/79 (as amended) by 249/82 by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... removal; hence the assessable value of the quantity diverted was required to be determined with reference to the price at which the respondents had sold such goods. And therefore, the order of the A.C. confirming the demand of differential duty issued on this basis was required to be confirmed and the Collector (Appeals) had erred in setting aside this order. 6. The Ld. Collector (Appeals) had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted in the AR 3. In this connection, he would like to rely on the Tribunal s order in the case of H.M.T. Limited reported in 1990 (45) E.L.T. 579 (Tribunal). 9. We have considered the above submissions. We find that valuation of excisable goods for the purposes of charging of duty of excise is required to be determined in accordance with Section 4 of the Act and subject to the other provisions o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
