1975 (10) TMI 100

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... case records. One of the contentions in that since the `Tiklies' or lids were supplied separately and not with the metal containers, their value should not be added to the value of the metal containers which had been supplied earlier. The appellants have admitted that the lids for which demand has been confirmed by the Asstt. Collector had been supplied to the same parties to whom metal container .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty on the lids is justified on facts and is correct in law. 2. The next plea is that confirmation of demand under Rule 10A is not justified and in support the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s. Elpbinston Spinning & Weaving Mills have been cited. It is stated that since the lids were removed with the full knowledge of the Central Excise Officers and they were not clan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eem to have informed the Deptt. at any stage that they were supplying the said quantity of the lids to the same parties to whom they had supplied the metal containers earlier without lids. Therefore, taking all the facts and circumstances of the case into consideration, the Assistant Collector was justified in confirming the demand of ₹ 1890.13 raised by the Supdt. of Central Excise. In view .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X