9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (2) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l - Appeal No. E/2457/2005- SM(BR) - Final Order No. 399/2007-SM(BR) - Dated:- 28-2-2007 - [Order per] - The appellant challenges the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) made on 28-1-2005, setting aside the Order-in-Original dated 18-11-99, by which the Deputy Commissioner had dropped the proceedings initiated under the show cause notice by which the Modvat credit was sought to be denied on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as also submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had no basis for stating that the cost of the glass bottles was not included in the assessable value of the final product. The learned Counsel cited the decision of the Tribunal in Devyani Beverages Limited v. Collector of Central Excise, Meerut reported in 1999 (113) E.L.T. 503 (Tribunal), in support of her contentions. 3. The learned Auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeals) appears to have proceeded on the footing that since the glass bottles used as containers for aerated water were returnable, the cost of such bottles was not includible in the assessable value of the goods. Though he noticed the provisions of the Board circular dated 13-9-1995 to the effect that Modvat credit on glass bottles may be permitted on the facts of the individual cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the cost of glass bottle was included in the assessable value of aerated water. The record discloses that, the appellant made a declaration on 5-9-1994 with regard to the cost in which it had confirmed that the value of glass bottles was included in the assessable value of the product in the mariner as detailed in that letter. Admittedly, the RG-23C Part-I and Part-II Register were maintained a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l record, merely because the adjudicating authority could have taken a different view was no ground for upsetting the order of the adjudicating authority in the appellate jurisdiction of the Commissioner unless found to be erroneous. The impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), could not, therefore, be sustained and is hereby set-aside and the order of the adjudicating authority stands restor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
