2000 (12) TMI 318

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essable value, subject to the above modification the order is maintained". The facts of the case leading to the above order are that the appellants were manufacturing cotton yarn. During a particular period, the appellants had not sufficient manufacture of yarn therefore they purchased from outside a part of the yarn and subjected it to the processes of warping and winding. There is no dispute that warping and widing are not processes of manufacture. The contention of the department was that the price of the yarn bought out from the market was much more than the price of the yarn manufactured by them. Therefore, the allegation of the department was that they should have paid duty after including the acquired cost of the bought out items. Th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ifferential duty confirmed by the authorities below was not warranted in their case. He, therefore, prays that the appeal may be allowed. 3. Countering the arguments, Shri Sreekumar Menon, ld. SDR submits that differential duty in the instant case has been calculated on the basis of the fact that the landed cost of the bought out yarn was much more than the yarn on which duty was paid. He submits that in the landed cost of the bought out yarn, the appellants submitted that they should be given the benefit such as freight, insurance and other charges. He submits that it was a question of differential amounts of price that was available with the authorities. He submits that whereas the appellant were purchasing the bought out cotton y....