TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1987 (5) TMI 284
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mber (T)]. - The learned Counsel for M/s. Ashok Leyland Mr. Sridharan argued vehemently that there had not been any removal of goods from the Chapter X premises to their spare parts and other manufacturing division. The goods were all available in the factory's premises and it would be possible for them to segregate the Chapter X procedure goods from the non-Chapter X-goods if sufficient time wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....till have to pay the duty. In this way the factory would stand to gain nothing by removing their Chapter X goods and parts to other departments of the factory. 2. The learned SDR Mr. Rajhans, however, said that the order of the Collector was conclusive and no further debate is possible. M/s. Ashok Leyland removed the goods they received free of duty and sold them as spare parts thereby depriving;....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntion in the order. 5. It is however, impossible for this Tribunal to go into the details of the arguments of the learned Counsel that they would be able to show by documentary evidence as well as by the actual goods that products had not been removed and that they were still available in their factory and that the factory would be able to account for them, and that as the goods were still in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stricter housekeeping and bookkeeping to prevent similar confusions from happening again. The learned Mr. Sridharan said that they get some parts both from Chapter X sources and from the market and that it would be easy for the two to be confused. We only note this phenomenon but can offer no comments : we leave it to the wisdom of the manufacturers to sort this problem out as best they can. 6. T....