2006 (1) TMI 529

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lant. Shri R.C. Sankhla, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. -  Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal whereby demand of Rs. 3,16,342/- was confirmed and penalty of Rs. One lakh was imposed. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of furniture items. The contention of the appellant is that the Commi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. The appellant also contended that the total value of the clearance is to be treated as cum duty price. In view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE v. Maurti Udyog Ltd. reported in 2002 (141) E.L.T. 3. 4. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in para 11 of the impugned order held that the demand in respect of traded items are not to be included in the tot....