9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 951X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for determination of liability - It is, therefore, not ascertainable from the record if the imported goods had been segregated, in terms of the claim of the appellants herein that 90% of the goods were branded and that only 10% remained unbranded or of the denial of exemption notification extended to the entire clearance instead of being restricted to goods on which ineligible brand names were affixed. The impugned order lacks the base essentials that signify disposal of grounds in appeal - the first appellate authority are directed to hear the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders - appeal allowed by way of remand. - EXCISE APPEAL NO: 1589 of 2011, 1590 of 2011, 1591 of 2011 - A/87061-87063/2019 - Dated:- 15-11-2019 - H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77; 5,00,000/-. 2. According to the investigation, the appellants were in the business of manufacture and sale of tooth brushes of brands such as EVORA , ROYAL MORNING SMILE and NICE . It is ascertained from the orders of the lower authorities that duty on tooth brushes was to be levied in accordance with retail selling price prescribed under section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1942 with effect from 1st March 2006. Furthermore, it is of important to note that tooth brushes were brought within the ambit of Third Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 from 1st March 2007, thereby deeming labelling or re-labelling and packing or re-packing to be manufacture. It is on the basis of these, as well as the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y liability and thereby leading to doubts that the submissions of the noticees had been ignored, we are guided by the conclusion in CCE v/s Johnson Johnson Ltd (Supra) relied upon by the appellants does not help them. In the said case the respondents were importing assorted medicines of varying potency and were repacking them for marketing. It was held by the Hon ble court that to be covered by the definition of manufacture, repacking would have to be from bulk packs to retail packs so as to render the product marketable. The appellants are admittedly packing tooth brushes which could be only from the tooth brushes packed in bulk. Import of loose tooth brushes would not be feasible. in the impugned order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
