Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 140 - AT - Central ExciseBenefit of N/N. 9/2003-CE dt. 1.3.2003 - suppression of facts - Whether otherwise the impugned product CERA Polycure was manufactured by the appellants or whether the same has been only traded by them? - Held that: - In the absence of any clear cut evidence to incorporate the allegations of manufacture of Cera Polycure W, the demand of duty demanded in respect of that item will not sustain and will have to be set aside - demand set aside. Whether the appellant's products would be classifiable under Chapter 3214 as held by the lower authorities? - Held that: - there has been no discussion or analysis on the reasons why the items would not be classifiable under 3824.90. In view of the contentions of the appellants, the matter should be considered afresh and conclusions arrived at concerning classification merited would only after proper analysis and reasoning - matter on remand. Whether duty liability can be foisted in respect of 18 products manufactured and originally cleared from the factory on payment of Central Excise duty, which was subsequently returned as sales returns for various reasons at their depot and sold to other purchasers on commercial invoice? - Held that: - From the orders of the lower authorities, we find that there is insufficient discussion and analysis to arrive at the conclusions against which the appellant is in appeal. Ld. Advocate has stated that they are in a position to prove their bonafide in the matter. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, this issue too needs to be sent back for re-adjudication - matter on remand. Appeal allowed in part and part matter on remand.
|