2009 (3) TMI 318

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. In the instant case, the appellants had not paid duty on the breakage of PET bottles of aerated water (final product) which is below 0.5%, permissible as per Board's Circular No. 261/1D/75-CX. 8, dated 17-9-1975. There was a demand of duty of Rs. 77,856/- and penalty of equal amount along with interest, which is upheld by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n favour of the assessee, which was followed by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Kol-III, vide Final Order Nos. A-866-867/Kol/08, dated 4-9-2008, CESTAT - KOL [2009 (245) E.L.T. 167 (T)]. 4. I find that the breakage of PET bottles during the manufacture and before removal is less than 0.5%, which is permissible as per Board's Circular. It is also seen that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s is a fit case for extending the benefit of doubt to the appellants, particularly, since they are periodically intimating to the Excise Department about the breakage every month and it was open to the Excise Authorities to make a visit for inspection of the same. The impugned orders are set aside and both the appeals are allowed." 5. In view of the above discussion and following the decision of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X