9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (6) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Soaps resulting at the premises of the processors at Kollam, however as regards the valuation, the Commissioner (Appeals), remanded the matter to the original authority for requantification. With the direction that imposition of Penalty as also its quantum would be reconsidered by the original consequent in the quantification of the demand. 2. The Commissioner concluded the appellants were liable to pay duty on his findings - "I have carefully considered these submissions made by the appellant. I find that the pleas of the applicant does not have any substance. As correctly pointed out by the Original authority in his order, a perusal of the agreement entered into by M/s. ICI Ltd. with both the above said units i.e. M/s. Kasturi Enterpr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uri Enterprises and Shree Vidya Enterprises. With the withdrawal of exemption, the liability to have manufacturer's registration was on M/s. ICI and M/s. ICI India Ltd. themselves had applied for the manufacturing registration which was granted to them. Licence to manufacture and sale of drugs vide Licence No. Drugs No. 42/25/87, dated 26-9-1987 beginning from 1-1-1993 to 31-12-1994 was issued to M/s. ICI India Ltd. Madras which bears the emblem and trade mark of ICI and indicates the address as M/s. ICI India Ltd. Thevally, Quilon, The above makes it clear that the primary manufacturers are ICI India Ltd., carrying out the manufacture in the premises provided by the above two Enterprises for which the two Enterprises as mentioned above get ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd find - (a) The question of a processor of the raw material whose efforts result in a new excisable goods, or the trader who supplied the raw material in part and or in full, is the manufacturer under the Central Excise Act, 1944, has been finally and conclusively settled, by the Constitution Bench decision in the case of Ujagar Prints etc. 1988 (38) E.L.T. 535 (S.C.), wherein the Apex Court in Para 30 of the reported decision laid down :- "30. In the case of processing houses, they become liable to pay excise duty not because they are the owners of the goods but because they cause the 'manufacture' the goods…" Therefore, we are not persuaded by the findings of payment of the duty liability determined on the appellants by the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
