9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 601X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt Per Shri S. K. Gaule : Heard both sides. The appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 36/Kol.II/2006 dated 26.5.2006 passed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Concrete Mixer Machine (CMM). It was alleged against the appellants that they cleared 112 nos. of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hence the appeal. 3. The contention of the appellant is that once the case was remanded to the lower authority, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) should not have held the sale of 112-CMM as removed clandestinely. The contention is that the allegation of clandestine removal has been made on the purported condition that the machine/motor is an integral part of CMM and the value of such motor is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 10/7 CMM fitted with engines/motors under Central Excise invoices, without taking into account the value of motors/engines amounting to Rs.5,46,796.50 and thereby paying less Central Excise duty amounting to Rs.23,073/-, in contravention with the provisions of Central Excise Rules. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in his order found as under : 5.2 As regards the allegation of manufacture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he light of this findings on the question of inclusion of value of motor/engine in the value of CMM. We find that neither side has challenged the remand order passed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). We find that the power of remand by the ld. Commissioner has been taken away by amendment of Section 35A of Central Excise Act, 1944 and the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of MIL India rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
