2017 (7) TMI 16

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he respondent ORDER The fact of the case is that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of steel pipes falling under chapter 73.  They are also undertaking works contract of supplying and laying of pipes apart from own manufacture. They are procuring manufactured pipes from the job worker and supply the same for execution of the works contract. 2. It is the case of the departm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was confirmed by the adjudicating authority.  The same was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).  Therefore, appellants are before me. 3. Shri Prakash Shah, ld. counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that as regards the first demand in respect of pipe manufactured by them the total value is towards the entire works contract.  He submits that considering the small ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t as regards the demand of approx. Rs. 5000/- ld. counsel has fairly conceded that due to the small amount he is not contesting the same.  I agree with his submission that the issue indeed involved interpretation of the valuation provision in a case where a value is towards the works contract and arrived at the value of 6(3)(b).  Therefore, looking to the nature of the issue no malafide ....