9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (6) TMI 298X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Appellant. Shri V.K. Dahiya, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - On an appeal filed against the order of the Collector confirming the demand for duty of Rs. 11,30,517/-, confiscating some goods and imposing penalty, the Tribunal set aside that order remanding the case to the Collector for consideration of a reconciliation statement and explanation submitted b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation list filed by it did not include these parts. There is no evidence to show that these goods are manufactured. It challenges the duty demand of Rs. 17,108/- on discount. 5. The Collector has relied upon the statement of Satish Shorewala of the appellant firm, that the goods manufactured by the appellant were flats, tubes, sections, profiles, strips. The contention that Shorewala was on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sp;The fact that some audit parties visited the unit or that the classification list did not mention flats, strips itself cannot lead to the conclusion that these are not manufactured and the extended period will not apply. The appellant could have manufactured these goods without mentioning in the classification list. In that situation any number of visits by the audit party could not have brough ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he has included treating on account of trail that should clearly be not included. We are therefore of the view that applicability of this notification requires re-examination at his end. 8. As the demand for Rs. 5241/- on copper rods the Collector has not considered the gate pass and delivery challans, in support of the claim for purchase submitted by the appellant, dismissing them as not r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
