9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Amritlal Chemaux Ltd [2015 (5) TMI 700 - SUPREME COURT] wherein the identical Chapter Note has been dealt with and the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the activity of re-packing/re-labelling alone does not amount to manufacture - Accordingly, the appellant’s activity being only re-packing/re-labelling of imported goods does not amount to manufacture, therefore, the clearance of such goods shall be correctly treated as removal of input as such. Extended period of limitation - Held that:- It is not only the appellant but also department throughout in the case of M/s Amritlal Chemaux Ltd and even in the case of CCE, Mumbai Vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. [2005 (9) TMI 85 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] taken a stand that the activity similar to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on payment of central excise duty without undertaking any process of the same. The duty so paid on the said inputs is less than the total cenvat credit availed. Therefore, the case of the department is that since the imported input sold as such on which credit was taken, the appellant is require to reverse the actual cenvat credit. Accordingly, the differential duty demand between cenvat credit availed and duty paid has been confirmed by the original authority. Being aggrieved by the order in original dated 08.01.2010, the appellant filed appeal before Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) which came to be rejected and order in original was upheld, therefore, the present appeal. 2. Sh. S.J. Vyas Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Sika India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Goa 2018 (361) ELT 1033 (Tri.Mum.) 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records, we find that as regard the merit of the case, the issue is no more under dispute as in terms of Chapter Note 10 of Chapter 29 which reads as under: 10. In relation to products of this Chapter, labelling or relabeling of containers and repacking from bulk packs to retail packs or the adoption of any other treatment to render the product marketable to the consumer, shall amount to manufacture . From the above chapter Note, it is clear that re-packing/re-labelling activity which was carried out by the appellant alone will not amount to manufacture but along with re-pac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
