TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (4) TMI 330
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant. Shri A.K. Chattopadhyay, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - The present appeal is against the Orders passed by the authorities below confirming demand of duty of Rs. 9,955.00 and imposing personal penalty of Rs. 6000.00 under the provisions of Rule 173Q. 2. The appellants are the manufacturer of jute goods and have their factory at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s arranged their own transport for delivery of the goods from the appellants' factory to the delivery point and as such, no lorry hire charges were borne by the appellants. However, the appellants deducted the equalised freight charges based upon the circulars issued by the East India Jute and Hessian Exchange Limited, Calcutta from the total contracted price with their customers so as to arrive a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....said show cause notices were confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner and by the first appellate authority. Hence the present appeal. 4.  We have heard Shri D.K. Saha, learned Consultant appearing for the appellants and Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, learned SDR for the Revenue. 5.  It is seen that in cases where the appellants have themselves delivered the goods to the railway heads and hav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of the goods up to the first delivery point, would come down to Rs. 90.00. In few of the cases, the buyers are taking the goods from the factory gate and themselves arranging the transportation, the net amount chargeable from the buyers has been arrived at by the appellants by again deducting Rs. 10.00 from Rs. 100.00 i.e. the contracted price. In nutshell, they have received only Rs. 90.00 f....