9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1752X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g of the goods are not cleared and does not establish that the same are for the detention charges - HELD THAT:- In as much as the legal issue is decided in favour of the assessee, the impugned orders in both the cases is set aside and the matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for examination of the documents. As the refund claim is involved, we expect the adjudicating authority to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpty containers used for export of the goods in terms of the notification number 41/07-ST dated 06.10.2007, we find that the issue stands decided by various decisions of the Tribunal in the following cases: 1. SRF Ltd. vs. CCE, Jaipur I [2015 (40) STR 980 (Tri-Del)]; 2. M/s. Shivam Exports, M/s. Mecshot Blasting Equipment Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Jaipur [2016-TIOL-376-CESTAT-DEL]; 3. M/s. Suncity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etention charges which are for storage and warehousing of the goods are not cleared and does not establish that the same are for the detention charges. He draws our attention to the said invoice and submits that the above findings of the lower authorities are factually incorrect. 4. In as much as the legal issue is decided in favour of the assessee, we set aside the impugned orders in both the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
