9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (3) TMI 248X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. Both the above appeals involve a common issue and are hence heard together and disposed of by this common order. The details of the appeals are as under : Sl. No. Appeal No. Period of demand Duty amount Rs. Date of show cause notice 1. E/5950/92-C July 90 to Oct. 90 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which duty of excise is leviable in whole or in part and since the final product in the instant case was pesticides, attracting nil rate, show cause notices were issued proposing recovery of duty on CMB Acid Chloride as set out in the table above. In respect of show cause notice dated 29-11-1990, the Assistant Collector confirmed duty demand. In addition, he imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,500/-. The C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in support of his argument, he relies upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of N.B. Sanjana v. The Elphinstone Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. reported in 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 399) (para 14) and the Supreme Court decision in the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta v. National Tobacco Company of India Ltd. reported in 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 416). He furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion leviable in part occurring in Notification 214/86 makes it very clear that levy must be something more than zero or Nil rate and that Nil rate of duty is not to be considered as the duty leviable. 5. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The dispute is with reference to the interpretation of the expression on which duty of excise is leviable whether in whole or in part . I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
