9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 672X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsp;Shri Manish Saharan, Advocate ORDER This appeal by the Revenue is against the order dated 27.04.2006 of Commissioner (Appeals-I), Indore. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of steel spirally welded pipes liable to Central Excise Duty. They were supplying cement coated M.S. Pipes on contract price to M/s. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. The spirally welded pi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue is before us. 2. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the provisions of Rule 5 would apply only when the goods are not sold at the factory gate but are being sold at a place other than the place of removal i.e. factory. In the present case the goods were removed from the premises of the appellant for the purpose of job w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re is no merit in the present appeal. Further, we have also noticed that in respect of the same respondent the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 50168 of 2016 dated 02.02.2016 upheld the similar finding of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue. Hence, we find no merit in the present appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. (Operative portion of the order pronounced in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
