9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (12) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : Jeet Ram Kait, Member (T) (Oral)]. Both these appeals raise a common question of law and hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law. 2. The appeal by M/s. Nelliyalam Tea Factory is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 172/2002 (CBE) (ADK) dated 24-9-2002 and the appeal filed by M/s. Lawson Tea Factory is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 174/2002 (CBE) (ADK) d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and bearing name/mark of the company is not a tea put up in unit container with brand name and hence not liable to duty for the period from 2-6-98 to 23-6-98. He also relied on the judgment rendered by the Hon ble High Court of Guwahati vide its order dated 5-9-2002 [2003 (161) E.L.T. 24 (Gau.)] wherein an identical issue of excisability of bulk tea removed/sold in 20 kgs. of chests or gunny bags ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ati vide its order dated 5-9-2002 as well as by the Eastern Zonal Bench in the case of Snow View Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Bolpur - 2003 (56) RLT 1022. Respectfully following the above judgments we hold that the tea put up in tea chests or gunny bags exceeding 20 Kgs. in weight and bearing name/mark of the company is not tea put up in unit container with brand name and are not liable to pay duty f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
