2002 (2) TMI 559

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice K.K. Usha, President]. - The issue that has come up for consideration is whether the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the levy of duty in respect of cost of pattern tooling carried out by the appellant for M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra is to be sustained. It is the case of the appellant that the apportioned cost of pattern tooling for M/s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n Castings for which the pattern was developed by the appellants in their factory. Therefore, no duty liability can be cast on the appellant. We find merit in the contention raised by the appellant. There is no material available before the Commissioner (Appeals) to show that during the relevant period supply of castings had been made to M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. That being so, the demand of d....