9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 964X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the documents, more particularly, the so called forward contract entered into between M/s. L&T and the assessee which was not even produced by the assessee. He submitted that the finding that the transaction was not at arm's length which was arrived at on the basis of material on record after detailed discussion has not even been commented upon and is side-tracked. On these facts, his submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hapter Heading 7305.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They had executed the work order of M/s. L T, Chennai in respect of their Water Supply Project to the Visakha Industries Water Supply Company Limited promoted by the A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited. For this purpose, M/s. L T had supplied the Spirally Welded MS Pipes at the rate of ₹ 15,000 per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng this period, the price of ₹ 15,000/- was agreed upon. The respondent also tried to disclose the basis of arriving at the aforesaid price. On this basis, it was contended that insofar as the respondent is concerned, the transaction value was ₹ 15,000/- and therefore, the duty was rightly paid thereupon. This contention of the respondent was not accepted by the Adjudicating Authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion made by the learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue is that the CESTAT has not discussed the facts of the present case appropriately and has accepted the version of the respondent-assessee blindly without even going into the documents, more particularly, the so called forward contract entered into between M/s. L T and the assessee which was not even produced by the assessee. He submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
