2005 (9) TMI 568

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal. 2. This is a case where the Department demanded duty from the Respondent on the rejected goods at the enhanced value on the basis that the Respondent had re-packed and re-lablled and sold to its customer at the enhanced price. The fact of the case are that the Respondent had placed an order for supply of bulk drug i.e. Cetirizine Dihydrochloride with M/s. Hetero Drugs Ltd. and M/s. Kopr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in demand. On filing appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), the Order-in-Original was set aside. Aggrieved by the same, the Department is in appeal on the ground that the goods were cleared after availing greater amount of credit and mis-declaring as inputs to have been cleared under Rule 57F2 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. As per the said provision, all removals of inputs for home consump .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e duty, which has been demanded from them, the supplier of these inputs, namely, M/s. Koran and M/s. Hetro Drugs will be eligible for much higher amount of credit of duty than what was suffered by these goods at the time of their sale to the appellant. 4. The reasons assigned by the Commissioner (Appeals) in setting aside the order-in-original are valid and justified. The department is in no way .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X