2007 (9) TMI 1

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-2004 which set aside the order in original that rejected the refund claim of the respondent. 2. Considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused records. I find from the records that the refund claim has arisen due to the reason that the appellants were required to clear their final products to their purchaser at a fixed price inclusive of all duties, freight and insurance. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder No. MTNL/20-80 (238) 98- MM/WLL Subs. Terminals (45K) HEIL & HFCL dated 4-7-2000 was issued to the Appellant for supply of single line fixed dated (Telecom Equipments). As per the purchase order the unit price of the said goods were Rs.16,633/- inclusive excise duty. The purchase order of MTNL was of dated 4-7-2000 in which excise duty was calculated @ 13% whereas the excise duty was increase....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r (Appeal) has correctly come to the conclusion that due to the calculation based on less percentage of excise duty rate, the assessable value was wrongly adopted by the respondent to pay the Central Excise Duty. It is undisputed that the purchasers of the respondents did not pay them the excess excise duty charged by them in the invoice. I find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision o....