9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iable to Central Excise Duty. They have entered into catering agreement with various airlines for supply of meal and food items in accordance with menu given by the respective airline from time to time. Normally the food items prepared by the appellants at their unit included the vegetarian/non-vegetarian meal items consisting of dal, curry, rice etc. bread, cakes, pastries, chocolates etc., cut fruits, cut vegetables and sweets and namkeens. The appellants procure various items in packed conditions, like curd, pickles etc. from third parties; the cutlery, crockery, soft drinks and juices and water are provided by the airlines. The food items prepared as per the menu are placed in the bowls and plates provided by the airlines and are wrappe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sustainable as it confirms duty on the tray consisting of all food preparations, salad, curd, sweets and water bottles. These items are not emerging due to process of manufacture undertaken by the appellant. The appellant is paying duty on various items like cakes, pastries and chocolates manufactured by them (b) The activity of placing various food items, prepared by the appellants as well as various bought out readymade items, in a tray either at the time of placing the tray in the trolley or at the time of serving the passengers on board does not amount to manufacture of a new commodity as contemplated under section 2 (f) of Central Excise Act, 1944. The tray consisting of main meal " dal, rice and vegetables and the tray consist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... intention to evade payment of duty. No such deliberate action on the part of the appellant has either been alleged or supported with evidence. 4. During the course of argument the ld. Counsel further elaborated on each one of the above points with the details of contract; with photographs of the various stages of placing the asserted items and the emergents of final food tray with water bottle at the time of service to the passengers on board. 5. The ld. A.R. reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 6. We find the points for decision in this appeal are: (a) Whether or not the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of edible preparations bearing the brand-name during the impugned period? (b) The sustainability o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... abelled bought out items like curd, butter etc. are not made by the appellant and (d) The pastries, chocolates and cakes manufactured by the appellants have suffered appropriate Central Excise duty. 10. We find the appellants have categorically asserted that placing these items together in a tray is being done on board by the airline staff before service to the passengers. The Revenues case is that the appellants are liable to Central Excise duty under the category of edible preparations bearing a brand-name. From the nature of process and the methodology of supply by the appellant to the airlines and thereafter by the airlines staff to the passengers on board, we find that it is not legally sustainable to tax the entire meal tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplying the above rule will arise thereafter only. 12. On perusal of the impugned order and on examining the submissions made by the appellants, we find that the Revenue has not established the liability on the appellant for their activity of manufacturing branded food preparations. Out of Food preparations as contained in the food tray served to the passengers on board, admittedly, the appellants did prepare dal, roti, rice, curry etc. and supplied the same in trays and bowls covered with aluminium foil. However, these are not the items on which Central Excise duty is sought to be demanded. The Central Excise duty was said to be demanded on the full value of the final complete food tray as served to the passengers on board the aircraft. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and Chocolates and are aware of the provisions of Central Excise law. As such, it was held that the compliance of Central Excise provisions for the impugned goods also rest with them and they have failed in all fronts. Since, the appellants failed to disclose the activities of supply of food preparation with their brand-name to different airlines; extended period was justified by the original authority. We find the demand for extended period and confirmation thereof by the impugned order have been made without any substantial ground considering the nature of dispute in the present case which is of legal interpretation. There is no supporting evidence to allege fraud, suppression with intend to evade payment of duty on the part of the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
