TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1088X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed detailed reply denying the liability to pay duty. It is seen that there is no evidence to establish that the floor sweepings cleared contained waste generated in process of manufacture. It is seen stated in the reply of the appellant that these items are not generated in manufacture, but are collected from the dustbins of various departments of their unit. The items include, waste of station ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .S. The issue that arises for consideration is whether appellant is liable to pay duty on waste removed by appellant as floor sweepings. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of BOPP films. The allegation leveled against the appellants is that during the period 1.09.1999 to 31.8.2004, the appellants cleared waste, parings and scrap of plastic to the value of ₹ 4,48,127/- de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel adverted to the statement enclosed alongwith the appeal indicating the quantum of waste generated during the period covered by the show cause notice. It is seen therein that for the period 1999-2000 the appellant has paid excise duty of ₹ 42,917/- on waste valued at ₹ 18,8848.48/-. In the year 2000-2001, the excise duty of ₹ 3,93,092/- is paid on waste of plastic valued at &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has confirmed the order observing that the appellants have only contested the value of the floor sweepings calculated and have accepted the duty liability and therefore are liable to pay the duty. This is factually wrong. The appellant have filed detailed reply denying the liability to pay duty. It is seen that there is no evidence to establish that the floor sweepings cleared contained waste gen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
