2017 (6) TMI 41

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e the question of dutiability does not arise, the question of classification of the said goods under chapter 48 and 49 does not arise - appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee.
Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Jeevesh Mehta & Shri Arun Pathak, Advocates for Assessee Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh, Deputy Commissioner (AR), for Revenue ORDER Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar The present Appeal Nos.E/1488, 1606/2009 are directed against Order-in-Appeal Nos.54-CE/GZB/2009 dated 26/02/2009 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Meerut-I at Ghaziabad. Further, Appeal Nos. E/1669, 1801/2011 are directed against Order-in-Appeal Nos.264-CE/GZB/2011 dated 25/03/2011 passed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tral Excise officer through his letter dated 05.09.2005 took objection to the clearance of payment of amount under said Sub-rule 3 of Rule 6 and directed to identify the classification of the said dummy packets. The show cause notice dated 27.10.2006 was issued, wherein it was proposed that the assessable value of the said dummy packs should be arrived at, on the basis of the cost of the manufacture. Through the said show cause notice Central Excise duty amounting to ₹ 18,432/- + Cess of ₹ 367/- was demanded. The said show cause notice was adjudicated through Order-in-Original dated 31.01.2008 wherein the demand was confirmed. Aggrieved by the said order, M/s International Tobacco preferred appeal before learned Commissioner (Ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 21. 4. Heard the parties. The learned Counsel for appellant has submitted that they have contended before the original authority and even before the issue of show cause notice that the goods manufactured by them are not marketable and therefore they are not excisable, and hence there is no question of determination of the duty payable on the same. Further, he contended that before the issue of letter dated 20th July, 2004, they were reversing Cenvat credit availed on the inputs cleared for manufacture of dummy packs. 5. Heard the learned A.R. for revenue, who has supported the impugned Order-in-Appeal and grounds of appeals filed by the revenue. 6. Having considered the rival contentions and on perusal of records, we find that M/s Intern .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X