9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (10) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceeded further to decide the issue on a ground stating that `In conclusion, Modvat credits of duty paid on plastic crates, the secondary packing of the product Coca Cola Aerated Water , is not admissible and therefore demands raised in this regard is maintainable . 2. Shri K.L. Rekhi, learned Consultant appearing for the appellants submits that a show cause notice was issued to the appellants alleging that the plastic crates are not the inputs in the manufacture of aerated water. He submits that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of aerated water and used plastic crates for transporting aerated water bottles from the factory to the wholesale market. He submits that the Additional Commissioner as adjudicating authority agreed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... astic crates. He, therefore, submits that on merits the case is fully covered by the decisions cited and relied upon by the appellants. He, therefore, prays that the appeal may be allowed. 3. Reiterating the findings of the lower authorities, Shri P.K. Jain, learned SDR submits that the Tribunal in the case of Amritsar Beverages Private Limited - 1996 (85) E.L.T. 359 had decided that plastic crates used for transportation of aerated water bottles does not fall within the ambit of packing material, as such do not qualify for the benefit of Modvat credit under Rule 57A. He submits that though Single Member Bench decision, however, only on point of admissibility of Modvat credit on plastic crates came up for decision in this case and that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that plastic crates are used as container for carrying bottles for the manufacture and marketing of aerated bottles (final product), are covered by term `packaging material under Rule 57A on which Modvat credit is admissible to the appellants. We note that the decision cited and relied upon by the learned SDR is Single Member Bench decision whereas the decision in the case of Black Diamond Beverages Limited cited and relied upon by the appellants is by two Member Bench, therefore, the decision in the case of Black Diamond Beverages Limited will prevail over the decision of Amritsar Beverages Private Limited. Moreover, we find that the decision in the case of Black Diamond Beverages Limited is later decision than in the case of Amrits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
