9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate For the Respondent : Shri K.P. Muralidharan, Supdt. (AR) ORDER Per P.K. Das A common issue is involved in all these applications and therefore all are taken up for disposal. 2. The applicants are engaged in the manufacture of HDPE Bottles classifiable under heading 3923 9090 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The applicants are job workers of M/s. Marico Indus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fied the adjudication order insofar as the demand would be confirmed from 1.4.2007 in view of insertion of Rule 10A in the Valuation Rules. The learned AR relied on the decision of the Tribunal on this issue. On the other hand, the learned counsel on behalf of the applicants relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Advance Surfactants India Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mangalore - 2011 (274) ELT 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase, then it is to be on record that LABSA is a product of the appellant herein and is consumed by HUL on appellants behalf or the said products are consumed by some other job worker of the appellant, in his factory for further manufacturing of goods. In the absence of any such situation, we are of the view that provisions of Rule 8 will not come into play. As already reproduced herein above, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
