2001 (4) TMI 260

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The appellants during the period from 1-10-1994 to 31-3-1995 made semi-finished moulds and dies on job work basis for the principal manufacturers - M/s. Lumax Industries Ltd., Gurgaon. During this period, they had cleared semi-finished moulds and dies valued at Rs. 5,08,838/- to M/s. Lumax Industries Ltd., Gurgaon under the challans prescribed under Rule 57F(3). The Dy. Commissioner of Central Exc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the finished goods i.e., dies. He has accordingly, confirmed duty demand of Rs. 76,326/- on the appellants and further imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on them. 2. The appeal of the party filed against the above order of the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise did not succeed and the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, New Delhi vide his Order dated 30-11-2000 dismissed the appeal upholdin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , it prima facie appears that if such activity was not considered to be permissible under the provisions of this Rule, then first the permission for availing the facility under the Rule should have been withdrawn and the duty, if any, should have been demanded from the principal manufacturer i.e., M/s. Lumax Indus. In this view of the matter, the orders passed by both the lower authorities, prima .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X