9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1815X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same were packed as per the specification of the Airlines and loaded according to the flight schedule of the Aircraft. The appellant also placed the bits of paper mentioning the name of the caterer on the cutlery packs supplied to Indian Airlines. Alleging that placing of the vegetables cuisine, rice, roti, salad etc. on a tray and placing the leaflets bearing the logo as well as the name of "Ambassador Sky Chef" in the cutlery pack placed on the tray, amounting to food preparation bearing brand name and accordingly, classifiable under Heading 2108.99 upto 28.02.2005 and under Tariff Item 2106 9099 thereafter, duty was demanded with interest and penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed with interest and penalty. Hence, the presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, and (d) The pastries, chocolates and cakes manufactured by the appellants have suffered appropriate Central Excise duty. 10. We find that appellants have categorically asserted that placing these items together in a tray is being done on board by the airline staff before service to the passengers. The Revenue's case is that the appellants are liable to Central Excise duty under the category of edible preparations bearing a brand-name. From the nature of process and the methodology of supply by the appellant to the airlines and thereafter by the airlines staff to the passengers on board, we find that it is not legally sustainable to tax the entire meal tray as edible preparations as the same emerges at the time of service to the passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned order and on examining the submissions made by the appellants, we find that the Revenue has not established the liability on the appellant for their activity of manufacturing branded food preparations. Out of Food preparations as contained in the food tray served to the passengers on board, admittedly, the appellants did prepare dal, roti, rice, curry, etc., and supplied the same in trays and bowls covered with aluminium foil. However, these are not the items on which Central Excise duty is sought to be demanded. The Central Excise duty was said to be demanded on the full value of the final complete food tray as served to the passengers on board the aircraft. There is nothing in the impugned order which will substantiate and support th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such, it was held that the compliance of Central Excise provisions for the impugned goods also rest with them and they have failed in all fronts. Since, the appellants failed to disclose the activities of supply of food preparation with their brand-name to different airlines; extended period was justified by the original authority. We find the demand for extended period and confirmation thereof by the impugned order have been made without any substantial ground considering the nature of dispute in the present case which is of legal interpretation. There is no supporting evidence to allege fraud, suppression with intend to evade payment of duty on the part of the appellants. In a similar matter, where appellants were one of the parties in ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
