9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (7) TMI 418X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. The appellants were manufacturing special purpose Motor vehicles such as D.C.P. Tenders, water tenders etc. On the intelligence that they were showing their turn over below the exemption slab, the jurisdictional Authorities examined their classification lists and other documents. On their finding, show cause notice dated 13-12-1988 was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ufactured by the assessees and confirmed duty leviable thereupon. He held that Chapter 87.05 being specifically precluded from the purview of Notification No. 175/86, the benefit thereof was wrongly taken by the assessee. He also held that benefit of Notification No. 162/86 was also wrongly taken. He confirmed the demand, imposed penalty, and confiscated land, building, plant etc. but permitted re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of Notification No. 162/86, learned Advocate submitted that Collector s order does not show the logic on which this denial was based. It is his claim that in case of some of the goods purchased from the manufacturers, payment of duty at the appropriate rate can be established. In case of goods purchased from the traders, it is his claim that such goods should be deemed to be duty paid. It is hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his point the case needs to be remanded. 5. At this stage of remand, we are not expressing any opinion about the claim made by the learned Advocate regarding the interpretation of Notification No. 162/86 on the observation that the Collector has not made any discussion on this aspect. The Collector in his finding in the de novo proceedings would be free to go into the area of availability of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
