1999 (3) TMI 278
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Appellant. Shri Satnam Singh, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - The appellants are aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi who has confirmed a demand of Rs. 2,70,33,595/- raised under four separate show cause notices and directed its recovery under Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, upholding the charge o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and struts used in the manufacture of motor vehicles. The Tribunal has held in para 10 of its order that the provisions of Rule 57F(1)(ii) are not applicable to the facts of the case. Para 10 is reproduced below : "We see great force in the contention of the appellants that the provisions of Rule 57F(1)(ii) are not applicable to the facts of this case. This Rule applies inter alia to a case w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rincipal manufacturer would not amount to removal for home consumption or export as the goods are clearly meant for further manufacture or processing which are returned to the principal manufacturer for use in his factory in the manufacture of final product." Apart from the above, Rule 57F(2) is in the nature of an exception to Rule 57F(1). The rule specifically begins with non-obstante clause ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oper Officer and (d)  Non-maintenance of accounts by appellants or job workers in the proforma prescribed in the trade notice. On a perusal of the relevant records, we are satisfied that the appellants have substantially complied with the procedural requirements of Rule 57F(2). Vide letter dated 17-7-1987, the appellants had requested the Assistant Collector for general permission under....
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
TaxTMI