TMI Blog2004 (9) TMI 537X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President]. Appellants herein are engaged in the manufacture of paper and paper board at Meerut. They have two manufacturing units, Unit No. 1 being engaged in the manufacture of craft paper and Unit No. 2 being engaged in the manufacture of Paper Board. They sell their finished goods on payment of duty to their sales depot located ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vis-a-vis selling price at which the consignment agents sold the goods. Details of differential duty payable for the financial year 2000-2001 were furnished and differential duty was shown as Rs. 1,94,744/-. Subsequently they made a final estimate of duty payable which worked out to Rs. 32,900/- for 1999-2000 and Rs. 6,52,917/- for 2000-2001 and paid this duty totalling to Rs. 6,85,814/-. Allega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le price of Rs. 26/- per Kg. of Duplex Board of a particular consignment agent, namely, Premier Print Pack (as per Invoice No. 1919 dated 20-12-2000) as price for sale to the consignment agents. Before passing of the impugned order the appellants submitted account sales of all consignment agents for the purpose of working out the duty liability but could not furnish the particulars of invoices und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transaction value of the goods and have to be adopted for levy of duty. Since the relevant details of the 8 consignment agents pertaining to the goods are now on record, we set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the Jurisdictional Commissioner for fresh decision on the basis of such invoices and for re-quantification of the duty demand on the above basis. The liability of the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
