2017 (10) TMI 333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The appellant is a manufacturer of cotton yarn on job work basis for M/s. Vijayakrishna Spinners (herein after referred to as the principal). The appellant received cotton from the principal and converted the same into yarn. The scrap cotton yarn was returned to the principal and the appellants while paying the duty reduced the cost of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....equal penalty. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2.   On behalf of the appellant, learned counsel Ms. Nivedita Mehta submitted that the appellant was under bonafide belief that they are adopting appropriate valuation based on the proposition laid down in the case of Ujagar Prints. Since the scrap was returned to the principal, they deducted the va....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bsp; As per the proposition laid down in Ujagar Prints case, the appellants have to pay duty on the raw materials plus cost of conversion charges plus margin of profit. It does not say that the appellant can deduct the cost of raw materials when the scrap was returned to the principal. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the contention raised by the appellant with regard to the demand of duty ....