9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. Vide the impugned order the authorities below have confirmed demand of duty of Rs. 46,946.50 and has imposed personal penalty of Rs. 2,000/- upon the appellant by including the cost of packing material in the assessable value of the final product. 2. Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, ld. Consultant appearing for the appellant submits that they were engaged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e relied upon the Tribunal decision in the case of Burns Philip India Ltd. v. CCE, Calcutta - II - 1997 (21) RLT 302 (CEGAT) and in the case of Shri Amarsinhji Mills Ltd. v. CCE, Rajkot - 1997 (94) E.L.T. 100. He further submits that the later decision has since been confirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court as reported in 2000 (117) E.L.T. A54. 3. The Hon ble Supreme Court in MRF case has held tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve been cleared in unpacked condition. We are not convinced with the above arguments of the Commissioner (Appeals). The fact that the appellants have cleared their product in unpacked condition at the factory gate is indicative of the fact that packing is not necessary for putting the machinery or parts thereof in the marketable condition. We find that wherever the goods were to be cleared to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
