9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1147X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er: Dr. D.M. Misra Heard both sides. 2. This is an appeal filed against Order-in-Appeal No. YDB/48/M-I/2011 dated 15.07.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of printed cartons, catch covers falling under Chapter sub-heading 48192090 and 48192010 of Central Excise Tariff A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st and penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed with interest and penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, rejected their appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 4. Learned Advocate Shrikant Kamat for the appellants submits that catch covers are also used for packing of materials namely, medicines and covered within th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the said catch covers from the factory. In support, the learned Advocate placed the relevant ER-1 returns filed during the relevant period. He submits that since the fact is within the knowledge of the department and issue involved is pure interpretation of law, which is evident from issuance of Section 11C notification, therefore, invocation of extended period of limitation is unsustainable. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion from exemption is applicable to goods which bear a brand name and the exclusion from coverage under these exclusion is limited to certain categories. That the packaging industry in the small-scale sector would generate its business by manufacture of packages bearing brand names is acknowledged by the amending exclusion in the notification of the Central Government. That 'catch cover' is a pack ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
