2008 (3) TMI 576

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Respondent. [Order per : P. Karthikeyan, Member (T)]. -  This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The respondents are not represented despite issue of notice to them. M/s. The Lakshmi Mills Co. Ltd. (LML) had procured components of DG set on payment of duty and got it assembled into DG set in its factory premises. As the respondent had not followed the Central Excise formalities, after....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the ground that M/s. The Lakshmi Mills Ltd. was the manufacturer of the impugned DG set and not M/s. Powerica Corporation, who supplied the parts/components. The appeal seeks to restore the order of the original authority. The learned SDR reiterates the grounds contained in the appeal filed. 3. We have considered the submissions of the representatives of Revenue. We find that LML had paid ....