2008 (6) TMI 24

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Appellant. S/Shri S.L. Meena, SDR and B.S. Suhag, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President] - Heard both sides. 2. Following issue has been referred to the Larger Bench :- "There appears to be apparently a conflict of opinion between the two Division Bench decisions of Amrit Bottlers Pvt. Ltd., reported in 2004 (177) E.L.T. 277 (Tri.-Del.) and Hindustan Coca Col .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he ground that the manufacturer failed to produce evidence, whether those goods were actually destroyed. In these circumstances demand was confirmed. The manufacturer filed appeal and the Tribunal dismissed the appeal and in para 4 of the order specifically held that admittedly sizeable goods were manufactured but no was (sic) evidence (sic) lead to prove that the goods in question were destroyed. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X