2005 (11) TMI 428 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Revenue's appeal against Commissioner's order regarding utilization of imported squids for export order on job work basis.

Analysis:
1. The Revenue appealed against the Commissioner's order regarding the utilization of imported squids for executing export orders on a job work basis. The Revenue alleged that the appellants did not fully utilize the imported squids as per Customs Notification No. 32/97-Cus. The Deputy Commissioner accepted the plea regarding the exported goods except for a specific quantity used for manufacturing rings, strips, tips, and tentacles. The Commissioner, after considering the assessee's plea, found that the Revenue failed to provide evidence that a certain quantity of squid was diverted for other purposes. The Commissioner noted that the standard input and output norms for rings could not be automatically applied to strips, tips, and tentacles. Moreover, the imported California Squid was of inferior quality, as confirmed by the assessee's request for re-export of the remaining raw material.

2. The Revenue contended that the Commissioner's findings were incorrect and legally flawed. They argued that there was no obligation on the Department to prove the diversion of the imported squids by the party. The Revenue claimed that the norms were correctly applied, and duty payment was necessary.

3. The Respondent filed a cross-objection seeking the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. They reiterated their arguments before the Commissioner and relied on his conclusions.

4. Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found that the Commissioner's findings on the utilization of the imported squids for manufacturing the exported items were appropriate. The Tribunal agreed that the raw material imported was of low quality, discolored, and smaller in size. Therefore, the Commissioner's decision that production norms for rings could not be directly applied to strips, tips, and tentacles was deemed correct. The Revenue failed to present any evidence to support the claim that a specific quantity of squid was diverted for other purposes by the Respondent. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, rejecting the Revenue's appeal as lacking merit.