LML LTD. Vs. C.C.E.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C .N.B. Nair, Member (T) This appeal is before us on remand by Hon'ble Supreme Court under order dt. 3.8.06 in Civil Appeal No. 895/01.

(2.) HEARD both sides and perused the record.

(3.) THE appellant/assessee is a manufacturer of scooters. The differential duty demand and penalty under the impugned order have arisen on account of dispute about the correct assessable value for scooters manufactured and sold by the appellant after payment of duty. The period of dispute is Jan'84 to May'87. Under the impugned order, the Commissioner has found that the cost realizations in respect of nine items were required to form part of the assessable value of scooters and on account of the exclusion of these items, non -payment of duty of about Rs. 30 lakhs took place. We may read the Commissioner's findings: In view of the above facts the various demands confirmed on different grounds are summarized below: