TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 807
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1. The Revenue is in appeal against Order-in-Original No.24/2003 dated 30/09/2003 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai. 2. A case of evasion of Central Excise duty was made against the respondent M/s. J.K. Furnishers, wherein the respondent did not discharge excise duty liability on the excisable goods, namely, furniture which were sold by them to the customers sometimes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Revenue is aggrieved of the same and has filed an appeal. 3. In the appeal memorandum, Revenue has urged the following. "The Commissioner allowed reduction of demand amount on account of cum-duty price. This resulted in reduction of demand amount by Rs. 49,798/-." The Commissioner was not correct in treating the total value received as cum-duty-price relying on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earing for the Revenue reiterates the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum. He also relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amrit Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Ghaziabad - 2007 (210) ELT 183 (SC) wherein it was held that unless it is shown by manufacturer that price of goods includes excise duty payable by him, no question of exclusion of duty element from the price will ....