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

....dita Mehta, Advocate for the Appellant 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 w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....57,569/- along with interest and imposed 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 retu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the submissions made by both sides. 5.   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....