2008 (7) TMI 652

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... N. Panda, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri S. Kumar, DR, for the Appellant. Shri J.P. Kaushik, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : M. Veeraiyan, Member (T)]. This is an appeal by the Department against the order of the Commissioner No. 787/CE/CHD/06 dated 28-8-06. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are as follows : (a) The appellant manufa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ee. 4. The learned DR for the Revenue submits that substantial quantity of production is being transferred to their sister unit and the cost of production is higher than the price at which the goods were transferred to their sister unit. He submits that Rule 8 is applicable to the present case. 5. Learned Advocate appearing for the respondent submits that in their own case, the Mumbai Bench of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X