2005 (2) TMI 754

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. [Order (Oral)]. The appellants are manufacturers of herbal shampoo. They used to entrust the work of repacking the commodity from bulk containers to retail containers, to their job workers. At the end of the job workers, there occurs processing loss to the tune of 2%. In other words, the quantity of repacked shampoo received back by the appellants from the job workers is less by 2%. I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... orted in 2002 (147) E.L.T. 274 (Tri.) = 2002 (50) RLT (CEGAT-Mum.). (b) CCE, Madras v. Bush Boake Allen (I) Ltd. reported in 2001 (47) RLT 712 (CEGAT-Che.) 3. Learned SDR reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and points out that the waste of shampoo in the instant case is not analogous to the input loss considered in the Board s Circular. 4. After considering the submissions, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X