Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2007 (9) TMI 138

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nufacturers of non-destructive testing equipment and consumables. According to the Revenue, they were having a godown at shed No. 31 APIIC, Phase-II, IDA, Pashyamylaram, in Medak District. These premises were not registered nor declared with the Central Excise Department. The appellants were re-packing certain chemicals in the said premises. The chemicals, namely, ZYGLO-ZP-4B and 9C RED concentrate were received in bulk packing of 205 litre of drums and these were re-packed into small packs of 1 kg. and cleared as 'trading goods' without payment of duty. From the investigation, it transpired that, the goods ZYGLO-ZP-4B were classifiable under chapter subheading 3206.20 and by virtue of Note 3 to Chapter 32, the activity of re packing in sma .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... partment. 4. The Appellate Commissioner upheld the demand in respect of the goods by classifying ZYGLO-ZP-4B under Chapter 3206.20 and 9C RED under Chapter Heading 2821.90. On the issue of limitation, it was held that, the appellants did not show that they declared the fact of repacking the goods to the Department. The contention that the notice was time-barred; was, therefore, rejected. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that, an intimation was given to the Department on 28th July, 1992 about the nature of the activity carried out by the appellant in respect of the said goods. He submitted that, though the classification as now declared by the Commissioner (Appeals) is not challenged by the appellant, the nature .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o the Collector. He drew our attention to Rule 43 for submitting that the notice addressed to the Asstt. Collector on 28-7-1992 cannot be considered to be a sufficient intimation of the correct facts, as required to be sent under that Rule. He argued that, in the said communication dated 28th July, 1992, it was stated that the trading activity was carried out in Phase-II IDA, Plot No. 36, Pashyamylaram, while the investigation had revealed that the appellant was having a godown in shed No. 31, IIC, Phase-Il, IDA, Pashyamylaram, in Medak District. Therefore, there was no intimation that they were carrying out the manufacturing activity at the same place. It was also submitted that, no further intimation was given in respect of the other prem .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le items not involving manufacture". There were several items mentioned in the said communication of which we are concerned in the present appeal only with the items ZYGLO-ZP-4B and 9C RED. As regards the products ZYGLO-ZP-4B and 9C RED, para 6 of the said communication read with Annexure-IV are relevant. In para 6, it was stated that, the appellant was importing the goods listed in Annexure-IV. It was further stated that, the appellant repacked the bulk goods into smaller packs and sold them with their brand name. It was specifically contended that re-packing bulk goods into smaller packs did not amount to manufacture in relation to any of the Chapter of Excise Tariff in which the imported goods were classified in the Bill of Entry, under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Revenue considered that there was no suppression of facts in respect of one of the items, namely, 8A RED, it does not stand to reason as to why a different stance should be adopted by the Revenue for the said two products in respect of which the intimation was clearly given as to the nature of the activity, namely, re-packing bulk goods into smaller packs and labelling them with their own brand name. The communication was addressed to the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, who, at the relevant time, was the proper officer. The Revenue cannot disown such communication as was sought to be done during the arguments by the learned Departmental Representative by pointing out that, the "Collector" was the authority mentioned in Rule 43. The subm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates