9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 475X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri A. Jayachandran, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jeet Ram Kait, Member (T) (Oral)]. - The appeals are directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 104 & 105/2000 (CBE) (GVN) both dated 8-11-2000 by which the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not accepted the duty paid by M/s. Hi-Tech Diecast Pvt. Ltd., the principal/primary manufacturer who paid the duty on the goods manufactured by the job wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nicast Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 3. The Additional Commissioner in his Orders-in-Original No. 23/99 (A.D.C.) both dated 31-12-99 has confirmed the duty amount of Rs. 9,62,457/- on the appellant M/s. Unicast Alloys Pvt. Ltd. and duty of Rs. 93,038/- on the other appellant M/s. Hi-Tech Die Cast Ltd. on the ground that since the goods have been manufactured by the job worker, the job worker should have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufactured by M/s. Unicast Alloys Pvt. Ltd., out of inputs intended for M/s. Hi-Tech Diecast Pvt. Ltd. 5. Ld. DR, Shri C. Mani invited our attention to the comments furnished by the department which have been received by them vide letter dated 28-5-2002 of the AC (Appeals) that M/s. Hi-Tech Diecast Pvt. Ltd. have cleared their modvatable inputs to M/s. UCA for manufacture of goods withou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Therefore, it has to be construed that M/s. Unicast Alloys Pvt. Ltd., the job manufacturer have not paid any duty for the goods which were manufactured out of inputs intended for M/s. Hi-Tech Diecast Pvt. Ltd. 6. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and have noted that the total duty of Rs. 9,76,064/- and of Rs. 93,038/- has been paid by M/s. Hi-Tech Diecast Pvt. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
