Duty re-quantification upheld when the appellant failed to furnish required material despite repeated opportunities.

Where a remand is confined to re-quantification of duty on the basis of wholesale price and permissible deductions, the reworked demand will be sustained if the appellant does not furnish the particulars needed for that exercise despite opportunities and hearings. The record showed no material to dislodge the adjudicating authority's finding that the required data had not been produced, so there was no basis to interfere with the impugned quantification. The challenge to re-quantification therefore failed, and the duty demand as re-quantified remained intact.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order quantifying the duty demand in compliance with the earlier remand order called for interference.

Analysis: The remand had been limited to re-quantification of duty on the basis of wholesale price and permissible deductions as indicated in the circular. The adjudicating authority recorded that the required particulars were not furnished despite opportunities and hearings, and the record showed no material before the appellant to dislodge that finding. In the absence of supporting material, the Tribunal found no basis to disturb the impugned order.

Conclusion: The impugned order was sustained and the challenge to the re-quantification failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was rejected, leaving the duty re-quantification intact.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a remand is limited to re-quantification and the appellant fails to furnish the material necessary for such exercise, the resulting order will not be interfered with.

---