9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1004X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner (Appeals) has observed that there are no materials on record to establish the marketability of the product and at the same time the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the product in question is of no use except for manufacturers like appellants to fill the same with jelly or any other liquid . The said finding clearly disclose the marketability aspect of the product - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/1328 of 2005 - 290/2011-EX(PB) - Dated:- 24-2-2011 - Hon'ble Shri Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, President Hon'ble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) Appellants : Shri Sunil Kumar, DR Respondent : Shri P. Ranjan, Advocate Per: Shri Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar: Heard the DR for the appellant and learned Advo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o. 8/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003, the exemption benefit was restricted to the first clearance of specified goods upto an aggregate value of Rs. 1 crore provided that the clearance of all the excisable goods in the preceding financial year had not exceeded Rs. 3 crores. In case of the respondents taking into consideration the sale of all the excisable goods manufactured in the financial year 2002-03, it had exceeded Rs. 3 crores and, therefore, they were not entitled for the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 8/2003 and could not have cleared the containers for jelly packing at nil rate of duty by availing the benefit under Notification No. 67/95-CE, it was observed that during the period April 2003 to December 2003 the respondents had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e revenue department, however, did not give credence of the said order on the ground of absence of evidence on record on the issue of marketability in the mater in hand. 4. We have heard the DR for the appellant and learned Advocate for the respondents. The DR has also submitted that the earlier order by the Commissioner (Appeals) was challenged by the respondent before the Tribunal without any success and demand against respondents was confirmed in the matter of M/s S.K. Industries Pvt. Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Gwalior reported in 2006 (200) ELT 565 (Tri. Del.). The learned Advocate for the respondents on the other hand submitted that irrespective of the earlier proceedings fact remains that in the case in hand the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
