TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh packed separately are intended to be used in the predetermined ratios - the goods were cleared even in 500 gms. – Relying upon The learned AR strongly relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Vs. Convertor Adhesive & Chemicals (P) Ltd. [2005 (8) TMI 17 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - It is apparent that the intended use of the product was not within the knowledge of the Department - the applicants failed to make out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit – assessee directed to deposit Rupees forty lakhs as pre-deposit – upon such submission rest of the duty to be stayed till the disposal – Partial stay granted. - E/536/2012 - - - Dated:- 19-3-2013 - P K Das And Mathew John, JJ. For the Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of Plastic Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise - 1998 (101) ELT 120. It has been held that classification of goods is to be determined on basis of the condition in which the product is removed from the factory and subsequent processing after removal from the factory gate cannot be determinative for the purpose of classification of the goods. He also submits that the goods are not sold as adhesive and therefore classification under Heading 3506 unsustainable. It is contended that the CBEC Circular No. 47/90 dated 31.8.1990 clarified that unless mode of presentation for sale is adhesive, the classification cannot be under Chapter 35 and it has to be only under Chapter 39. 3. The learned AR reiterates the, findings of the Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bench, the learned consultant submits that the goods were cleared even in 500 gms. Prima facie, we are satisfied with the submission of the learned AR. The learned AR strongly relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Vs. Convertor Adhesive Chemicals (P) Ltd. - 2006 (199) ELT 194 (SC). The submission of the learned counsel in respect of limitation would be looked into at the time of hearing. It is apparent that the intended use of the product was not within the knowledge of the Department. In view of that the applicants failed to make out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of entire amount of duty along with interest and penalty. Accordingly, the applicant is directed to deposit Rs.40,00, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
