2012 (8) TMI 409

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , A.C.(A.R.) for the Respondent (s)   Per Shri S.K.Gaule.   1. Heard both sides. Appellant filed this appeal against the decision of Commissioner vide No.V(18)1/CE/Tech/Kol-VII/2003/2752 dated 27.02.2006 vide which it was communicated that remission application filed by the appellant filed for the period from March 2002 to December, 2005 was rejected.   2. Briefly stated the fact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ow the limit prescribed by the Board and the breakages and losses during the material period was ranging from 0.06% to 0.01% which is much less than the limit prescribed by the Board. The contention is that as regard losses due to breakage they have been recording in their periodical return filed from time to time. The contention is that this Tribunal have been taking consistent view regarding the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r, as mentioned above, in the instant case and I find that the allowance as indicated in the Board s circular does not relate to breakage owing to pressure-filling with CO2 and is relevant to breakage in course of handling. Even in that case, the physical verification vis-`-vis quantification of breakage is mandatory. Since the same could not be done, the benefit arising out of the Board s circula .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X