2016 (12) TMI 207

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a, PER: ASHOK JINDAL The Revenue has filed this against the impugned order. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent is manufacturer of cement and selling the same on contracted price with buyers. During the impugned period, the respondent was liable to pay duty @ Rs. 259 per MT where as the respondent shows the duty component @ Rs. 600 per MT. The respondent took credit of duty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed that the impugned order be support his contention, he relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Photo Films Mfg.Co.Ltd.-2011 (268) ELT 529 (Tri.-Chennai). 4. On the other hand, learned Counsel reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides, I find that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X