9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, Member (T) Mrs. Sudha Koka, SDR, for the Appellant. Shri K. Srinivas Rao, Authorised Representative, for the Respondent. [Order per S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - These Revenue's appeals arise from the Order-in-Appeal No. 07 08/2006 (H-1) CE dated 24-3-2006 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the demand confirmed by the Order-in-Original No. 27 28/2005 dated 1-12-2005, passed by the Assistant Commissioner. The Revenue proceeded to deny the benefit of Notification No. 8/97-C.E. dated 1-3-1997 in respect of the raw material indigenously procured in India. The Respondents are 100% E.O.U. The Commissioner (Appeals) after a detailed consideration held that that the raw materials used for the manufacture of polished ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue was subject matter of the cited judgment. Findings recorded by this Bench in Para 12 is reproduced herein below. "We have carefully considered the submissions and noted all the points including the citations. The matter pertaining to what raw materials are has been dealt in great detail by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CCE v. Balarpur Industries Ltd. (supra). The relevant test laid down by the Apex Court is that the raw materials are "the ingredient goes into the making of the end-product in the sense that without its absence the presence of the end-product as such is rendered impossible. This quantity should coalesce with the requirement that its utilization is in the manufacturing process as distinct from the manufacturing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te pores or cracks. Before polishing the granites, these two items are applied and after polishing processes they get eliminated. Therefore, the finding rendered by the Tribunal in the case of Forbes Gokak Ltd. (supra) and Maruti Cottex Ltd. (supra) in the light of the Apex Court judgment in the case of CCE v. Balarpur Industries Ltd. (supra) would clearly apply to the facts of these cases. The clarificatory Board Circular and letters issued by the Development Commissioners clarifying the item to be consumables cannot be discounted and they are required to be taken into consideration. 12.2. To sum up, there is no merit in the Commissioners orders confirming demands and they are required to set aside by allowing the parties app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
