9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1052X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue filed these appeals against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), whereby adjudication orders were set aside. 2. Ld. SDR on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the Grounds of Appeal. He submits that the respondents are manufacturer of rough forgings classifiable under sub-heading no. 7326.19 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. He submits that the respondents cleared 373 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... materials under Rule 173H of the Rules. In this connection, he drew the attention of the Bench to the statement of Shri Shakti Chandra Bimal, Authorised Signatory. 4. Ld. Advocate reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) examined the invoices in respect of clearance of 3737 nos. of forgings, wherein no Heat Nos. were mentioned. He further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing or re-conditioning of the defective forgings and also the reason for giving a different heat number in order to make the buyer accept the forgings and these explanations are quite reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Further, the appellants themselves have admitted that they had received more than 12,000 numbers of forging out of which nearly 8000 pieces have been sent back w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 3737 nos. of forgings is mainly based on the fact that the Heat No. shown in the initial invoice is not tallied with the Heat Nos. shown in the subsequent invoices. I find that the respondents took a stand before the Commissioner (Appeals) that no Heat Nos. was mentioned in the invoices and this fact was accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the basis of the copies of the documents availabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
