9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Dev, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - The duty of Rs. 10.35 lakhs has been demanded and penalty of equal amount imposed on the ground that subsequent to amendment of Section 4 of the Act in 1996, that part of the price of the goods sold by the applicant from its depot which is representative of equalised freight is not eligible for deduction from the assessa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possible to have the matter decided and orders signed before 2nd February, 2001, when Mr. J.N. Srinivasa Murthy, one of the members of the bench retires from service. Therefore, in order to avoid both sides having to reargue the matter, it was decided to adjourn the hearing to 7-2-2001. 5. The counsel for the applicant says that on this issue there are about five pending cases at various sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant cites before us various orders of this Tribunal of which we cite the case in CCE v. Karna Industries Ltd. - 1991 (53) E.L.T. 566 permitting the course that he requests. Therefore, on the unusual facts of this case, in addition to waiving deposit and staying their recovery, we direct the department not to proceed with adjudication of notices, or recovery of duty of all other demands in enforcem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sable value. 3. The Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals) have declined to accept the applicability of the observations of the Supreme Court in paragraph 24 of the judgment in Government of India v. Madras Rubber Factory Ltd. - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 433 for the reason that the position in law has changed. We are prima facie unable to see how, by the amendment carried out to Section 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
