2004 (6) TMI 534

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri Vimlesh Kumar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - By the impugned order, the Commissioner of Central Excise has denied the benefit of concessional rate of duty of Rs. 1500/- per colour T.V. set paid at the time of their clearance, as per Notification Nos. 68/86, dated 10-2-86, 77/87, dated 1-3-87 and 122/88, dated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ral Excise, Ahmedabad by which differential duty of Rs. 1,750/- per set was confirmed on the very same ground as in the present order, and penalties imposed, the manufacturer and the Director filed Appeal Nos. 2524/92A and 4363/92A which were disposed of by final Order Nos. 1106-1107/96A, dated 26-3-96 [1996 (86) E.L.T. 257 (T)], in which it was held that the cost of packing material admittedly su....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f various findings recorded and observations made therein. While passing the present order, the Commissioner has proceeded on the erroneous basis that the Tribunal had directed him to decide afresh. In view of the findings of the Tribunal on the 3 elements mentioned herein above, none of them can be included in the assessable value of the T.V. sets. What is liable to be included is only the notion....