2011 (4) TMI 135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... athy,   Heard both sides.   2. Shri M.N. Bharathi, Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellants states that though the authorities below have recorded payment of only Rs. 4,20,000/- towards duty, the appellants had paid another Rs.1,97,612/- towards duty on 30.01.99 and on 03.09.99, before issue of the Order-in-Original on 01.12.99. He further states that in addition to paying the duty am .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ever, no objection to grant of the benefit of cum-duty assessment to the appellants and remanding the matter for fresh determination on that ground to the original authority.   4. Considering the submissions from both sides, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original authority for re-determining the duty amount after extending the benefit of cum-duty assessment. He .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X