Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1998 (1) TMI 221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing the grounds relating to the deductions from the Cum-Duty-Price. They are also aggrieved that the request for giving the Modvat credit had not been discussed by the Adjudicating Authority. He submitted that they are not raising the issues relating to the classification or the goods being manufactured through job workers etc. He referred to the observations of the Adjudicating Authority at page 5 of his order which are extracted below : "The party though claimed that they got the wires and cables manufactured on job basis from Delhi but failed to produce any documentary evidence in this regard. Thus their version is not acceptable. The party vide their letter dated 11-5-1989 claimed certain deductions on account of freight and other as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....22) RLT 768 - Vijay Prakash Industries v. C.C.E. (iii) 1998 (99) E.L.T. 402 (Tribunal) = 1997 (23) RLT 850 - Honeyrex Products (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E., Bangalore. He pleaded that as the personal hearing was held on 27-4-1989 and they had filed documentary evidence for claiming deductions from the price under communication dated 11-5-1989 which had been referred to by the Adjudicating Authority but not discussed the matter be remanded to the jurisdictional Adjudicating Authority. 4. Shri D.S. Negi, SDR while pleading that the documents did not support the case of the appellants, has no objection for remand on this limited issue. 5. We have carefully considered the matter. The appellants had not agitated the issues relat....