2003 (5) TMI 292

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt. Shri Kumar Santosh, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice K.K. Usha, President]. - When the application for stay came up for hearing, it was agreed by both sides that the appeal itself can be disposed of. We, therefore, dispense with the condition of pre-deposit and proceed to dispose of the appeal. 2. The issue raised in this appeal by the assessee challenging the ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... reported in 2002 (143) E.L.T. 543. 3. We heard ld. Counsel for the appellant as well as ld. DR, for the Revenue. There is no dispute on the fact that the goods valued at Rs. 2,21,40,412/- were supplied through the sub-contractor of the appellant at the site of the unit. There is no case that the above goods were manufactured by the appellant and cleared from its factory. The decision reli....