9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent case. Following the normal consistent practice of imposing redemption fine of around 15% of value of confiscated goods, we find the redemption fine can be reduced to around ₹ 1,00,000/- - appeal allowed in part. - Excise Appeal No.52444 of 2016 - A/50098/2018-EX[DB] - Dated:- 1-1-2018 - Mr. (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President And Mr. B Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri Rajnish Kumar Verma, Consultant - for the Appellants Shri M R Sharma, DR - for the Respondent ORDER Per: B Ravichandaran The appeal is against order dated 13.5.2016 of Commissioner (Appeals), Bhopal. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plastic containers for their client with brand name of Fortune which belonged t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is not applicable to their goods. 4. He also contested the confiscation and huge redemption fine imposed upon them along with penalty. He submitted that issue involved is one of the interpretation and with changed provisions with effect from 29.4.2010, they have all reasons to believe that they are not barred for availing SSI exemption. 5. Further, he submitted that they have discharged the full duty liability by availing credit of capital goods and inputs after the receipt of original order. Such credit taken has already been approved by the department. 6. Learned DR contested the appeal and submitted that the amendment carried out on 29.4.10 will not be applicable to the facts of the present case. It is clear that the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed packing material itself. In other words, the exemption for packing material is not barred when they bear brand of contents of such packing. Apparently, the packing material is filled with other branded goods for sale which will only exhibit the contents it contain, on the packing material. It is clear that exemption available is only with reference to packing material which are used for packing branded goods and such packing material bear such brands. In the present case, brand is of packing materials itself and not the content thereof. Accordingly, we find that exclusion made by the amendment is not relevant to the present case. The appellant manufactured branded goods in the brand name of the client. And accordingly, are barred from av ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
