TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (9) TMI 299
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta-II. 2. Arguing on the appeal, Shri J.M. Kenedy, learned JDR, submits that vide the impugned order, the Additional Commissioner has excluded the value of the bought-out items from the value of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n notification. 3. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the Respondents. As such, we have ourselves gone through the impugned order along with the Grounds of Appeal raised by the Revenue. 4. After hearing Shri Kenedy and after going through the records, we find that in the show cause notice issued to the appellants, it was the Department's own case that the value of the bought-out item....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een deducted and then, the value so arrived at has been taken as the total value of clearance of the finished goods manufactured by the appellants and after allowing the exemption limit as per S.S.I. Notification, the duty was proposed to be confirmed on the excess clearance value. 5. The Additional Commissioner, on a plea by the appellants, further referred the matter to the appellants' j....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t right from the beginning had intended to deduct the value of the bought-out items from the total clearance of the appellants' factory. The dispute during adjudication was only on the figures of the bought-out items depending upon the quantitative deduction of this value which has been settled by the Additional Commissioner based upon the Central Excise Officers' report. There is nothing in the p....