2015 (3) TMI 173

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t would fall under Chapter 56 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. We do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the appellant as regards the issue of classification and following our order dt.29.05.2009 uphold the impugned order which classify the product manufactured by the appellant under Chapter 54. Penalty of ₹ 1 lakh imposed by the adjudicating authority on the appellant under Rul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... see by Final Order dt.29.05.2009 passed by this Bench. Ld.Counsel would submit that the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Apex Court which has been admitted but no stay is granted. It is also his submission that the confirmation of demand in the case in hand is of ₹ 14,90,552/- with interest and penalty of ₹ 1 lakh is in respect of the differential duty liability within the n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the appellant that it would fall under Chapter 56 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. We do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the appellant as regards the issue of classification and following our order dt.29.05.2009 uphold the impugned order which classify the product manufactured by the appellant under Chapter 54. 5. We find the penalty of ₹ 1 lakh imposed by the adjudicating .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X