Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 847 - AT - Central ExciseClassification of goods - Mehandi Cone/Paste and Mehandi Powder - N/N. 12/2012-CE dated 17.03.12 - Board vide letter dated 10.07.2014 - Held that:- The said entry under notification is very clear with reference to henna paste. The only condition is that the said paste should not have been mixed with any other ingredients. The scope of the said entry was clarified by the Board vide letter dated 10.07.2014. The objection of the Revenue, that no other ingredients should have been added to claim the exemption, is correct. However, the facts of the present case did not reveal that any other ingredients at all has been added in making the henna paste. Admittedly, the clove oil is a liquid used to make henna paste from powder and make it marketable as such paste in cones - There is no evidence on record which could show presence of any active ingredients to heena powder to make the heena paste other than the said oil or liquid. Therefore, the present appeal of the appellant is required to be allowed in view of clarification issued by Board vide letter dated 10.07.2014. The facts of the present case did not reveal that any other ingredients at all has been added in making the henna paste. Admittedly, the clove oil is a liquid used to make henna paste from powder and make it marketable as such paste in cones. We note that the said process is for making the paste, marketable/useable much later by the customers. There is no evidence on record which could show presence of any active ingredients to heena powder to make the heena paste other than the said oil or liquid. Therefore, the present appeal of the appellant is required to be allowed in view of clarification issued by Board vide letter dated 10.07.2014. The adjudicating authority as well as the first appellate authority was not correct in placing reliance on the CRCL Report dated 29.05.2014 which was neither forming part of the SCN nor pertained to the lot which were manufactured and cleared by the appellant during the period covered in the SCN i.e. June 2013 to March 2014 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|