TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 515X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. Revenue and the party have filed these appeal against Order-in-Origianl No. CEX-14/2006 (Commr.) dated 14-12-2006 passed by the Commissioner of Customs Central Excise, Guntur. 2. First we shall take up the party s appeal. 3. Mr V. Raghuraman, the learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants and Mr. S.G. Dewalwar, SDR, for the Revenue. Party s appeal E/248/2007 4. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of aerated water under various brand names. The products are packed in glass bottle which are durable packing and capable of repeated use in the manufacture of aerated water. These glass bottles are transported to various locations in plastic crates. Revenue proceeded against the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 003 and not. Quantity of crates purchased as assumed. It is submitted that as crates are reusable and the appellant has only received 7000 crates during the above period for mazza, the appellant is not required to reverse the duty based on the number of crates of mazza sold as same empty crates were repeatedly used on which no Cenvat Credit was availed. The demand is for the period March 2001 to March 2003 for which statements were recorded by the department on 13-3-2003, but Show Cause Notice dated 27-2-2006 was received on 6-3-2006- delay of about 3 years for issue of Show Cause Notice - clearly barred by limitation. (c) During the relevant period, separate books of account were maintained and the Cenvat paid on common inputs were d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2006 (195) E.L.T. 190 (Tri.-Bang.) 6 Ballarpur Industries Ltd . v. CCE - 2006 (201) E.L.T. 146 (Tri.-Mumbai) 7 Chandrapur Magnet Wires (P) Ltd . v. CCE - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 003 (S.C) 8 Ruchi Infrastructure Ltd. Others v. CCE - 2008 (224) E.L.T. 123 (Tribunal) = 2008 (85) RLT 312 (CESTAT-Bang.) 9 Sathyakala Agro Oil Product s v. CCE - 2008 (223) E.L.T. 441 (Tri.-Bang.) 10 CCE v. IPCA Laboratories Ltd . - 2005 (67) RLT 509 (CESTAT-Del.) 11 Wipro Ltd . v. CCE - 2004 (175) E.L.T. 219 (Tri.-Bang.) 12 CCE v. Raja Ram Marbles Pvt. Ltd . - 2004 (64) RLT 138 (CESTAT-Del.) 13 GTN Textiles Ltd . v. CCE ., Hy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accounted initially. Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 contemplates maintenance of accounts only for virgin inputs yet to enter the manufacturing stream. There is also strong force in the appellants contention that the Show Cause Notice is time barred. In view of the above factual situation the impugned order has no merits, hence the same is liable to be set aside. Therefore, we allow the appeal with consequential relief. Revenue s appeal : 8. The Revenue has appealed against the impugned order on the following grounds: 9. The Show Cause Notice seeks to recover 8% of the price of Maaza inasmuch as the assessee has availed of Cenvat credit in respect of inputs used in both dutiable as well as exempted final products and he has not m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
