9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 571X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he has given a relief to the respondents on the point of limitation. 2. The case in brief is that a Show Cause Notice was issued to M/s. Choubey Sugandhit Tambaku, Bhagalpur (in brief the party ) in which it was alleged that they had captively consumed the unbranded tobacco and did not pay Central E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facture of branded chewing tobacco falling under CSH 2404.41. For such clearances, the party were required to pay Central Excise duty which was not done. Further, they did not mention unbranded Khaini in Col. No. 6 of their C.L. nor reflected any declaration under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for availing Modvat credit on the said product which was available to them during the period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should have made further enquiries or verifications. Mere non-mention of unbranded items in Column 6 of the Classification List specifically does not tantamount to a suppression or misdeclaration of facts. He has also observed that the respondents have been undertaking the manufacturing process since 1986 and the Department was well aware of the manufacturing process. In these circumstances, he ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther filled in the poly packs having printed brand-name over it. If that is the manufacturing process, to plead on the part of the Revenue that the respondents had not declared the manufacture of unbranded chewing tobacco, is to plead ignorance on their part. It is also seen that for the period from 20-5-1994 to 10-8-1994, the respondents were entitled to avail the facility of Modvat credit of du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
