TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (8) TMI 65
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... EOU. They send their raw material to their job workers for processing and following the Central Excise procedure as required. 2. Show cause notice dated 24-10-2003 was issued by the Assistant Commissioner demanding duty of Rs. 1,43,229.00 from the Appellants on the grounds that a quantity of 1 730 000 kg raw material was not duly accounted for from the job worker. In their reply dated 17-12-2003....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng upon para 4 of the Order, submitted that in this case also, the Bench while admitting the Appeal held that there was only a burr which was generated and such burr could not be held as identifiable waste. Shri Murthy, further submitted that the existence of an invisible loss was taken note of by the Hon'ble Bench and similar facts and circumstances exist in the Appellants case too. In addition, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been highlighted by them in their reply to the notice as well as before the Commissioner (Appeals) is to be upheld. This fact is crucial to the whole case. The Appellants have also referred to the declaration dated 30-5-2002 in their Appeal Memorandum, wherein, Appellants have disclosed that there would be 20% manufacturing loss due to gases released in the atmosphere and also fine powder released....