2000 (6) TMI 298

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Dahiya, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - On an appeal filed against the order of the Collector confirming the demand for duty of Rs. 11,30,517/-, confiscating some goods and imposing penalty, the Tribunal set aside that order remanding the case to the Collector for consideration of a reconciliation statement and explanation submitted by the assessee to sup....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d by it did not include these parts. There is no evidence to show that these goods are manufactured. It challenges the duty demand of Rs. 17,108/- on discount. 5.  The Collector has relied upon the statement of Satish Shorewala of the appellant firm, that the goods manufactured by the appellant were flats, tubes, sections, profiles, strips. The contention that Shorewala was only dealing wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that some audit parties visited the unit or that the classification list did not mention flats, strips itself cannot lead to the conclusion that these are not manufactured and the extended period will not apply. The appellant could have manufactured these goods without mentioning in the classification list. In that situation any number of visits by the audit party could not have brought the manuf....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncluded treating on account of trail that should clearly be not included. We are therefore of the view that applicability of this notification requires re-examination at his end. 8. As the demand for Rs. 5241/- on copper rods the Collector has not considered the gate pass and delivery challans, in support of the claim for purchase submitted by the appellant, dismissing them as not relevant....