TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (3) TMI 512
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - Adjournment is requested on the ground that the Counsel for the appellant "will not be available." We do not consider such an assertion sufficient to grant adjournment. We have read the memorandum of appeal, and heard the Departmental representative. 2. The appellant manufactures steel forgings. Notice was issued to it proposing to add to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat such inspection was conducted at all stages of the process of manufacture, from the raw material to the proof machining. He therefore distinguished the decision in Shree Pipe Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 1992 (59) E.L.T. 462 and held that the cost would be includible. 4. The appeal reiterates the contention that the test carried out by Lloyds Ltd. was an additional test and that the goods in any cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is done for it by another agency. In that case, the ratio of this decision that the goods are already marketable may not apply. While it is contended in the appeal that the test by Lloyds Ltd. was additional to the test by the appellant and therefore optional, there is not the slightest evidence cited to support it. We are therefore of the view that this whether the testing by Lloyds Ltd. was in....