2016 (5) TMI 898

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cture of excisable goods viz. Seamless Rings both unmachined and machined ones falling under Chapter Sub Heading 7326.90 and 8482.00 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Demand notice was issued and confirmed for the differential duty of Rs. 4,05,364.63 short paid alleging incorrect determination of assessable value of finished goods; in as much as the Appellant had failed to include the cost of drawing and design charges in the assessable value of the Seamless Rings . The matter had travelled to this Tribunal. After considering the issue whether the value of drawing and design charges be includable in the assesable value of Seamless Rings, remanded the matter vide Order dt.25.03.1998 for verification of facts, observing as follows:- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s on the drawing and design charges attributable to unmachined rings, particularly the purchase order/agreement with their customers. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the order of the Adjudicating authority. 6. The Ld. Adv. vehemently argued that only after verification/scrutiny of evidences produced, the Assistant Commissioner, deducting their duty liability on account of drawing and design charges relating to machined rings, refunded Rs. 2,23,642.81 against the initial deposit of Rs. 3,00,000. It is his contention that since their unit had been closed, the Appellant could not attend the hearing in the remand proceeding before the Addl. Commissioner of Excise, which has resulted in confirmation of the entire demand verificat....