2000 (5) TMI 584

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. - In this appeal, the Revenue has challenged the validity of the impugned order of Commissioner vide which he has reversed the Order-in-Original of the Additional Commissioner who confirmed the demand of Rs. 3,11,831.33 on the respondents. 2. The respondents are job-workers and they are engaged in the carrying out process of heat setting and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eard both the sides. The facts are not much in dispute. The respondents, as a job-workers received the goods (fabrics) for heat setting and stentering from the manufacturers and after doing the job, they returned the goods to them. No violation of provisions of Rules 57F(3) and 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 can be said to had been done by them. The case of the respondents is fully cover .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X