9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1278X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal against the impugned order demanded duty for the period from 1.6.2006 to 31.3.2007. 2. The Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was engaged in the activity of packing/repacking of auto parts. On 1.6.2006, the activity of packing/repacking of auto parts was included in the excise net. After introduction of repacking shall amount to manufacture which became excisable with effect from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... how cause notice was adjudicated. The appellant produced an inventory of the stock as on 31.5.2006 but the same was not considered and proposal made in the show cause notice were confirmed. The matter was agitated before the Commissioner (Appeals) who did not give any credence to the defence taken by the appellant. Therefore, the appellant is in appeal before me. 3. Learned Counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant has claimed that on 31.5.2006, there was inventory of stock of finished goods the same was required to be considered by the adjudicating authority and if the same is excluded from the total turnover of the impugned period, in that circumstance, the turnover fall below the threshold limit of SSI exemption of Notification No.8/03-CE, the appellant is not liable to pay duty. These facts are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
