2008 (11) TMI 535

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This is an appeal against the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. IND-1/234/2006, dated 22-6-06. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The respondents had sent certain capital goods for repair to the original supplier of the capital goods. The said party, admittedly, had undertaken repair and while undertaking repair, appears to have replaced certain parts .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e of the dispatching/supplying unit. There is no dispute that the duty has been paid by the supplying unit. I have not been shown that the said duty has been varied by any proceeding at the supplier's end. 6. Under these circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal by the Department is, therefore, rejected. (Dictated and prono .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X