TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (2) TMI 329
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....M/s. Ujagar Prints Ltd. vs. UOI: 1989 (39) E.L.T. 493 (SC) the respondent changed the method of payment of duty and submitted fresh pricelist under Rule 173C of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and proposed to revise the price which was found to be less than the earlier price to the extent of Rs.20-70%. Subsequently, periodical show-cause notices were issued and ultimately the issue before us involves as many as eight show-cause notices covering period of about 33 months from July 1995 to March 1998. Total amount demanded and confirmed is Rs.2, 14, 52,172/- by the original adjudicating authority which has been set aside by the Commissioner (A) and Revenue is in appeal against this decision. 2. The impugned order had been passed on the three occa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thority which form the basis for conclusion have been considered by the Commissioner (A) in his order. First of all, the Commissioner (A) has given the details of 5 invoices of 5 different suppliers and has shown that in all these cases, the freight and insurance, CST had been taken into account for arriving at the landed cost of the raw materials. He has concluded that the adjudicating authority had come to the conclusion regarding non-inclusion of the transportation cost in the landed cost as well as taxes without verifying the supporting documents. We find that it is not only the adjudicating authority who did not do this, but even while reviewing also, this aspect was not considered. The Committee observed that assessee for calculation ....