2017 (8) TMI 434

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ondent ORDER Per: SS GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 17.11.2003 passed by the Commissioner (A) where is upheld the Order-in-Original and dismissed the appeal of the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Printed Circuit Board (PCB) which are used by the buyer/receiver manufacturing unit f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for PCBs were given by the buyer, the cost relating to this i.e., cost of specification and cost of developing screen printing which has not formed part of value, the same is required to be loaded in the assessable value of the said PCBs. Consequently, a show-cause notice dated 25.3.1999 was issue by the Commissioner and this snow-cause notice culminated in the Order-in-Original dated 30.10.2000 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oner (A) by contending that the cost of designs/specifications is not includable in the assessable value of PCB. Thereafter, the Commissioner (A) vide order dated 30.9.2002 remanded the cases for passing de novo adjudication and thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner vide Order dated 11.3.2003 confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 31,592/- and Rs. 93,299/- aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X