9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 741X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order per : Justice K.K. Usha, President]. This appeal at the instance of the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Nos. 791-813-CE/DLH/2001, dated 14-9-2001. Under the above order the Commissioner (Appeals) had disposed of 23 appeals filed by the assessee against 23 Orders-in-Original Nos. 120-142/2000 passed by the Dy. Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,813.94 pertaining to the 9 show cause notices for the period after 28-9-96 and rest of the demands, pertaining to the period prior to 28-9-96 (when Section 4 was amended) were dropped as unsustainable. A penalty of Rs. 10,00,000/- was also imposed on the assessee. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that there is no merit in the allegation on the show cause notice that transportation charges re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n followed by the Commissioner (Appeals). We find no merit in this contention. Firstly we have to observe that there is no allegation in the show cause notice that the sale has taken place at the buyers place. The show cause notice proceeded on the ground that the sale was at factory gate. The only allegation was that the assessee had collected transportation charges from the buyers in excess of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
