9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , DR for the respondent ORDER After hearing both the sides duly represented by Shri R.K. Verma, ld. Advocate for the appellant and Shri R.K. Manjhi, ld. DR for the respondent, we find that the dispute in the present appeal relates to assessable value of various types of sanitary wares manufactured by the assessee. Whereas the appellant has adopted the value in terms of the provisions of Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Director of Legal Metrology, New Delhi itself, which do not stand considered by the authorities. It is also seen that this opinion dated 17.06.2003 given by the Director of Legal Metrology is in response to a query by Revenue and such query does not stand produced before us so as to enable us to find out as to what was asked for from the Legal Metrology Department. We also find favour with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Measures Act, 1976. Without commenting upon the applicability of the said decision to the facts of the instant case, we not that the said decision was subsequently taken note of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Subhash Arjundas Kataria - 2011-TIOL-122 -SC-MISC and the matter was referred to the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 4. Ld. Advocate appearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Original Adjudicating Authority for re-consideration of all the above issues. However, we make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the disputed issue and the assessee is within his right to raise any ground, plea or evidence, etc. to that effect in support of his case. [Order dictated and pronounced in open court] X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
