2011 (7) TMI 714

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... respondent Heard both sides. 2. Revenue filed this appeal against OIA no. YDB/136 & 137/M-III/2009 dated 29.10.2009 whereby Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the lower adjudicating authority's order.  3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that respondent is engaged in the manufacture of goods falling under Chapter 83 of CETA 1985. The respondent availed CENVAT credit on input and i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the assessable value. The respondent has not discharged the burden. On specific query from the Bench whether this aspect is covered under show-cause notice issued under the respondent the JDR could not produce any evidence.  5. The respondent filed a counter to the appeal styled as cross objection. However, ld. counsel submitted that issue is decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnatak....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....riod prior to amendment of the said Rule i.e. 01.04.2008, is concerned. The decision is squarely applicable to the present case also since the period involved in the case is prior to 01.04.2008 as already discussed, supra. 7. So far as contention of JDR that the respondent could not show that they have included the assessable value an element of service tax paid on GTA is included in the assess....