9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 375X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ismissed - appeal dismissed as not maintainable. - E/300/09 - FO/A/76439/2016 - Dated:- 21-12-2016 - Shri P. K. Choudhary, Member(Judicial) Shri A.Roy, Supdt.(AR) for the Revenue Shri Ravi Raghavan, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per: Shri P. K. Choudhary Brief facts of the case are that M/s.Pepsico India Holding Pvt.Ltd. are manufacturers of Aerated Water, Soda Water and Fruit Pulp. The Appellant declared in their ER-1 returns that 1,43,757 bottles and 5150 cases of Aerated Water of various brands, Soda and Slice (soft drinks), stated to be Godown breakage, which were cleared without payment of excise duty amounting to ₹ 3,78,143/- on the ground that the aforesaid quantities of bottles were broken/leak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have recorded the contention of the Ld. JDR that the appellants are using plastic bottles instead of glass bottles. (ii) Boards Circular No. ID/3/70-CX 8 dated 08.09.71 further states that Care should be taken to see that this limit is not acted upon as a matter of course, and each individual case is investigated by the Range Staff..... . Thus mere declaration by the appellant that there breakage loss is below 0.5% does not give them the automatic right to get remission. They are required by Rule, to satisfy the Central Excise authorities about the actual loss. No arrangement for verification was ever made by the assessee and on the contrary they have claimed repeatedly that the breakage loss cannot be physically produced for inspec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y in the scheme of Self Assessment Procedure. 4. The impugned order dated 04.09.08 of the Hon ble Tribunal has no general application, as it has not laid down any law while granting relief to the appellant without taking into account hard facts such as non-production of so called broken bottles by the assessee and the resultant lack of verification of so called broken/damaged bottles, as envisaged in the Board's Circular no.ID/3/70-CX 8 dated 08.09.71. Moreover, the period covered by the said CESTAT order is different from the instant cases. 3. Ld.Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent submitted that the Appeal filed by the Revenue has been dismissed by the Hon ble High Court in their own case as reported in - 2013 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
