2006 (9) TMI 330

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This group of appeals, which raises common issue, has been preferred against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) to the extent that it goes against the Revenue. 2. By the order-in-original duty demands were confirmed and penalties imposed on the ground that when the goods were returned manufacturing process was undertaken and the assessee' .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d duty paid excisable goods back from the customer for reprocessing under rule 173H by their letter dated 29-1-2000. They had sought permission to receive the duty paid goods under rule 173H(2)(c) from the Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the nature of the reprocessing indicated that manufacture was involved. 5. The learned authorized representative .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed to maintain detailed account of the returned goods and the processes to which they are subjected after their return to the factory under sub-rule (2) of rule 173L. It is not alleged that no such accounts were maintained. Therefore, there is no warrant for interfering with the impugned order setting aside the penalties imposed and reducing the penalty in one case, on the contention that the chap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X