9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1456X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , for respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair 1. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapter 25, 38 & 69 of the CETA,1985. They cleared the goods, namely, "Acconex" falling under Chapter 38.24 in bulk packs on payment of Central Excise Duty under the cover of excise invoice to M/s. Abhijit Enterprises, Thane, for packing, re-packing, labeling and re-labeling. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty was confirmed and equal amount of penalty under Section 11AC was imposed. Being aggrieved by the order-in-original, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected the appeal by upholding the order-in-original, therefore the appellants are before us. 2. Shri Prasad Paranjape, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellants have discharg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He further submits that after clearing of the goods by the appellants, the job-worker has carried out the activity to packing, re-packing, labeling, re-labeling, which as per Chapter Note 5 of Chapter 38. These activities are amounts to manufacture, therefore, if any demand can be raised it should be against the job-worker and not from the appellant. 3. Shri H.M. Dixit, Ld. Assistant Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -workers end in respect of packing material and packing activities, the same cannot be loaded further on the transaction value and cannot be demanded duty there upon. In this fact, we are of the clear view that the duty discharged by the appellant on the ultimate sale value is correct and legal, accordingly, no further addition should be made. Accordingly, no differential duty demand arises. The i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
