2016 (5) TMI 131

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Mr. G. Thangaraj, Consultant For the Respondent : Mr. Mohammad Yusuf, A.R. ORDER PER : ARCHANA WADHWA After hearing both sides, we find that the impugned order stands passed by the adjudicating authority in de novo proceedings when the matter was earlier remanded by the Tribunal. As per the facts on record, the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of telephone instruments classif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... value. Such contention of the appellant was not found favour with by the lower authorities and the matter travelled up to the Tribunal. 3. Tribunal vide its order dated 09.07.2001, considered the above stand of the assessee and remanded the matter to the lower authorities with a direction to consider the appellants factory gate sale prices. In de novo proceedings, the lower authorities confir....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ce at the factory gate, it is not the price which was approved by the jurisdictional Central Excise Officers in terms of the price-lists filed by them. He clarifies that during the relevant period, they have to file price-lists as was the law at that time which were approved by their jurisdictional Central Excise Proper Officer. As such, the approved price-lists were required to be adopted as the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der of the Tribunal, the matter was remanded to adopt the approved assessable value at the factory gate in respect of sales made through depots, where there were sales from the factory gate as also from the depots. The lower authorities have done this exercise. While doing so, they have refused to adopt the approved assessable value. We note that the original dispute relates to the depot sale pric....