9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 458X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R.K. Thakur, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. After hearing both the sides duly represented by Shri Laxmikumaran Advocate with Shri R.K. Hasija, Advocate on behalf of the applicants and Shri H.K. Thakur, Joint CDR for the Revenue, we find that duty of Rs. 3,61,71,854/- stands confirmed against the applicant/appellant for the period April, 2005 to De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty in terms of Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. 3. The demand in the present case can be divided into two parts -Prior to 1-3-2005 and alter 1-3-2005. As regards the first part of the demand that is 1-3-2005, the same stands confirmed by the authorities below on the ground that the Hon ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Aman Marble Industries (P) Ltd. will not apply, inasmuch as, the same w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e out a prima facie case in their favour in respect of duty demand prior to 1-3-2005. 4. As regards the duty confirmation after the said period, the same stands confirmed on the ground that classification adopted by the appellants under Chapter 25 was not proper and the goods correctly fell under Chapter 68. We find that it was on account of introduction of Chapter Note 6 to Chapter 25 that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
