2012 (12) TMI 180

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Respondent Per P.G. Chacko This appeal filed by the Department is against the dropping of a demand of duty on the respondent. The respondent had, during the period from June 2001 to March 2002, cleared to other units of theirs waste and scrap of cast iron generated in the course of manufacture of textile manufacture. Such clearances were made on payment of duty on assessable value of Rs.3/- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hat the CAS-4 guidelines invoked by the appellate Commissioner are not applicable to the period of dispute in this case. The respondent has filed written submissions styled as Cross-Objections. 2. After hearing the learned Additional Commissioner (AR) for the appellant and the consultant for the respondent, we find that the respondent has paid an amount of Rs.1,59,900/- as differential duty on th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X