1987 (10) TMI 253

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... valorem by inadvertance, error and mis-conception while the correct duty payable was only 10%. 3. A show cause notice was issued as to why their refund claims should not be rejected. The Assistant Collector rejected the contentions of the respondents on the ground that the products in question were used by M/s. I.T.I. in their various Exchanges and that the wires were used at heights varying from one ft. to five ft. above the ground. He was of the view that they are not over-ground tele-communication wires and cables and rejected the refund claims. 4. An appeal was filed before the Collector (Appeals) Madras, who held that the expression "over ground" found in Notification 173/68-C.E. was similar to the expression used in the present not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....annot be held to be a precedent. In support of his contention, he relied on 1987 (27) E.L.T. 273 (A.P.) = 1985 ECR 1001 (A.P.) M/s. Golden Press; 1979 E.L.T. (J 501) M/s. Coramandal Fertilisers Ltd. v. U.O.I. and Three Others and 1978 E.L.T. (J 350) M/s. Hemraj Gordhandas. 6. Sh. B.K. Seth, Consultant urged that the language of Notification 173/68was identical to the terms used in 197/79 and the decision of the Govt. of India in the earlier case cannot be considered as erroneous. He urged that the switch board wires are also over ground tele-communication wires supplied on demand for tele-communication purposes and the order of the Collector was correct. 7. We have already set out in the earlier paragraph the terms of the notification. It....