9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (11) TMI 902X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant company (hereinafter referred to as appellant) is a manufacturer of Pan Masala containing tobacco (gutkha), Pan Masala (sada), and Rajni Scented Supari. The appellant brought different raw material and also procured duty paid laminated films. The laminated films were converted into pouches for packing the processed products like pan masala, scented supari, etc. The appellant availed credit of duty paid on laminated films which were used in the manufacture of pouches which were ultimately used for packing final products namely scented supari. In the present case, some quantity of supari cleared by them on payment of duty was returned back under Rule 16 of Central Excise Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hey were required to be used best before six months but the said time limit expired. On receipt of the said supari for re-processing, naturally pouches were cut open and supari was processed and cleared on payment of applicable rate of duty as supari. The goods returned back under Rule 16 are scented supari and there was no justification for bifurcating what was received by the appellant as two distinct products namely supari and pouches and to contend that the pouches were not re-processed. The demand of duty proposed on quantities which have gone into such pouches is not warranted. 5. Learned SDR reiterates the findings and reasoning of the Commissioner, in so far as the same relates to the merits of the case. He also seeks restora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es has been returned back under Rule 16, to say that the credit taken on laminated films at earlier stages is irregular in terms of Rule 14 is not warranted. I do not find any justification for confirming the demand of duty. Therefore, the appeal of the appellant party deserves to be allowed. When the appeal of the party is allowed, the question of enhancement of penalty equal to duty confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) does not arise. Since the appeals are disposed of on merits, the issue of limitation raised on behalf of the appellant is not being gone into. 7. The appeal of appellant is allowed with consequential relief. The appeal of the department is rejected. (Dictated and Pronounced in the open Court) - - TaxTMI - TMITa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
