2016 (11) TMI 689

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Mullick, Advocate for the respondent-assessee ORDER Per B. Ravichandran The appeal by Revenue is against order dated 04.05.2012 of Commissioner (Appeals), Delhi-I. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of various novelty gift items during the period 2003 to 2007. They were also engaged in trading. Proceedings were initiated against them for non-payment of Central Excise duty of Rs. 14, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ey got the goods made from the respondent and the price included excise duty also. It was further submitted that important activities like inspection and packing related to the manufacture of said goods were undertaken by the respondent in their premises. Hence, the respondents are to be held as manufacturers and liable to excise duty. 3. Ld. Counsel for the respondent submitted that they receive .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bunal held that suppliers of raw material cannot be held as manufacturers. The respondents herein have submitted supporting documentary evidences in the form of affidavit from job workers, details of raw material sent, quantity of items manufactured, ledger account confirming payment of job charges, copies of bills, invoices raised on each job workers, TDS certificate towards Income Tax deducted a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X