9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (11) TMI 331X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xtensively. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the respondent is a manufacturer of VP sugar and molasses. During the season 1999-2000, they re-processed left over brown sugar of season 1997-98, 1998-99 and also scrap sugar and jelly of season 1998-99; similarly they reprocessed brown sugar and scrap sugar of season 1999-2000 during the season 2000-01 and the left over brown sugar and scrap sugar of 2000-01 in season 2001-02 etc. Show cause notice dated 24-1-05 was issued alleging that there was less recovery of sugar reprocessed during 5 sugar seasons namely, 1999-2000 to 2003-2004. It was alleged in the show cause notice that the quantity reprocessed was 35,390 Qtls. and quantity of sugar recovered was only 23809 Qtls. and conseque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... note of payment of duty of Rs. 6,25,900/- on 12518 Qtls. of molasses. He also submits that as rightly noted by the Commissioner (Appeals), the emergences of brown sugar, scarp sugar were evident from periodical returns submitted to the department in the form of RT -7 (c) and RT 8(c). He also claimed that demand is also hit by time bar. He seeks upholding the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 5.2 He also submits that the so called brown sugar is not marketable as such and it consists of recoverable sugar and molasses in different proportions. Drawing my attention to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Bharat Sugar Mills case reported in 1994 (69) E.L.T. 686, he submits that the so called brown sugar cannot be treated as suga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yield the same quantity of sugar. It is obvious that the percentage of recovery of sugar during reprocessing will depend upon the extent of molasses available in such brown sugar/scrap sugar. Under these circumstances, to rely on a percentage arrived at in the case of M/s. KSCM Ltd. cited supra as an outer limit is not appropriate. Regarding the claim on behalf of the department that application for remission of duty ought to have been obtained, the same cannot be accepted in the facts and circumstances of the case. The material used for reprocessing could not be treated as excisable and it is not being disputed that the same has been issued for reprocessing after sending intimation in advance during every season starting from 1999-2000 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
