2015 (10) TMI 1140

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....For the Respondent : Mr K P Muralidharan, AC (AR) ORDER Per: D N Panda: Both the appeals No. E/797/2004 and E/798/2004 when heard analogous it reveals that appellant M/s. Talent Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd. (TSIPL) was manufacturer of bars and rods using ingots received from its job worker M/s. Tata Alloys Pvt. Ltd. (TAPL) which is in appeal No. E/798/2004. Appellant TSIPL cleared its goods....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....case of TAPL and TSIPL arose out of the self same cause. Therefore, adjudication of TSIPL has a bearing on TAPL in so far as duty liability on the ingots is concerned. Records reveal that ingots manufactured by TAPL was using inputs supplied by TSIPL. Ingots became altogether a different product for dutiability. When TAPL was manufacturer of such ingots, its duty liability is undeniable. But, no d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., then there may not be difficulty to work out duty liability of TAPL. Ld. Counsel at this stage says that ld. adjudicating authority upon remand shall examine applicability of notification No. 214/86-CE dated 25.03.86 TAPL. So also he has to examine applicability of notification No. 7/97-CE dated 1.3.97. Ld. adjudicating authority shall accordingly do well to examine this aspect during re-adjudic....