2000 (2) TMI 349

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... i, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. Adjournment is requested by Mr. G.S. Dave, officer excise on the ground that the Advocate R.C. Saxena is held up in Delhi on account of a conference. We consider this request to be entirely improper and dismiss it forthwith. 2. We have thereafter heard Mr. Dave and the departmental representative. 3. Duty of Rs. 9.08 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Tribunal that rejected material could be used as an input. We do not see how the fact that this was a reference to Rule 57(1)(2) in the invoice, for the defective goods which were returned by the applicant makes any difference. This rule at the relevant time permitted a manufacturer to clear the inputs received on payment of duty. Applicant has therefore prima facie case in this regard too. 5. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X