2015 (2) TMI 1068

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....this Tribunals order No. A/41-43/12/EB/C-II dated 17/1/2012. In the said order, the Tribunal has remanded the matter to the Original authority for examining whether the appellant would be eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 08/1997-CE dated 1/3/1997 (which was claimed before this Tribunal) and also whether there is part duplication of demand. Thereafter, the impugned order is passed. The Ld. Commissioner was provided number of opportunities to the appellant and also supplied all possible documents to prove both the claims. Since appellant could not bring any evidence to support his claim for benefit of Notification No. 8/1997-CE dt. 1/3/1997. Ld. Commissioner have re-confirmed the said amount and it is also held that there is no p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....yarn used in the goods cleared in DTA. However, Ld. Counsel was unable to produce any such document or evidence. 3. Ld. A.R. submitted that the application made by applicant on 18/8/2000 proves contrary to their claim. The statement clearly indicates that imported material worth approx. Rs. 8/- lakhs was used by them in the production of the goods which were not exported. Obviously, such material was input for the goods cleared in DTA. Ld. A.R. also submitted that the demand in the other show cause notice is relating to fabric while duty demand in the present case is relating to the yarn sent to job worker. Neither the said yarn nor fabric in the appellants unit was received back and hence there is no question of duplication of demand. ....