TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 824X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chandani, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order per : M.V. Ravindran, Member (J)]. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No. SDK (1998 1999) 20 21/M-1/2003 dated 31-1-2003. 2. Considered the submission made by both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this appeal is regarding the correct value of grey fabrics supplied by the merchant m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... another invoice reflecting a lesser value of fabrics than actually paid by the trader to the manufacturer. The adjudicating authority appears to have reached an unsupported finding without any evidential basis that the trader in fact had given another purchase bill to the appellant for the disputed grey fabrics, but this was replaced by the appellant with a different invoice reflecting lower purch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nufacturers were produced before the authorities below. They were not aware that these invoices of the grey fabric were incorrect. 6. On perusal on the order, we find that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) came to the conclusion on the ground that the Revenue is not able to bring on record connivance, if any, by the respondent as regards the misdeclaration of value of grey fabrics. Before us also r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d also there being no legal requirement for the processors to verify the correctness of the declaration furnished by the owners, extended period of limitation is not applicable. 8. The finding recorded by the Tribunal is a finding of fact which does not call for any interference. 7. Accordingly in view of the above reasoning and respectfully following the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
