2016 (10) TMI 787

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Shri Govind Dixit, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : S.K. Mohanty, Member (J)]. - This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 22-9-2006 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals-I), Customs & Central Excise, Jaipur. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Maize Starch, which is exempted from payment of Central Excise duty in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the present case is no more res integra in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai v. Nebulae Health Care Ltd. - 2015 (325) E.L.T. 431 (S.C.). 5. On the other hand, Shri Govind Dixit, ld. DR appearing for the respondent reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order and further submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion notification since the branded goods manufactured on job work basis is not covered by the said notification. The relevant paragraph of the said judgment is extracted below :- "...........It also follows that once excise duty is paid by the manufacturer on such branded goods manufactured, the brand name whereof belongs to another person, on job work basis, the SSI Unit would be entitled to Cen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X