1998 (11) TMI 293

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. - In his order-in-original dated 29-1-1992 the Additional Collector held that following the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Ujagar Prints the valuation for the purpose of charging duty where the goods were processed by a job worker, would be the value of the grey fabrics plus processing charges plus his .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the revenue is peculiar. It cites Notification No. 305/77-C.E., dated 5-11-1977 and makes an indirect claim, that the principal manufacturer is the actual manufacturer and therefore the price charged by them would become the basis of calculation of the assessable value. In our opinion, the very basis of this notification would cease to exist by virtue of the finding of the Supreme Court in the cit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X