2014 (5) TMI 330

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 The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order for demand of differential duty by denying the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002, dated 1-3-2002, Sl. Nos. 321 and 322. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacturer of telecom instruments and obtained an order for supply of Base Station Controllers and Base Transceiver Systems known as BS....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....goods, therefore appellants are not entitled for the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002 for concessional rate of duty. Accordingly, differential duty was demanded. Aggrieved for demand of differential duty appellant is before us. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that, on examination of the goods at their factory they found shortage of the goods and immediately they informed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... intended finished goods. Admittedly, the short supplied goods were not used in manufacture of the intended goods. Therefore benefit of notification is not available. Hence, the impugned order is to be upheld. 5. Heard both sides. 6. Considering the fact that the appellant has found short supplied goods and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002 and it is also admitted positio....