TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1385X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t be held liable for payment of such duty for the period prior to such undertaking - demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No.51278 of 2017 - A/58745/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 21-12-2017 - Mr. (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President And Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Sh. T. R. Rustagi, Advocate - for the appellant Sh. M. R. Sharma, AR - for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch restricted such exemption to goods which did not bear the brand name or not sold under the brand name. The branded bags thus became chargeable to duty w.e.f. 01.03.2011 if the same is classifiable under heading 63. The appellant took registration w.e.f. 01.03.2011 and also undertook to pay the duty even though such goods were being manufactured by the job-worker. The Department issued show caus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .03.2011 and for the period prior the appellant will not be liable to pay Central Excise duty and same is required to be done by the job worker who are actual manufacturers of the impugned goods. 5. On the other hand, ld. AR appearing for the Revenue justified the impugned order. He submitted that the goods were got manufactured by the appellant from the job workers even for the period prior to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s with reference to the question who is liable to pay the duty. 8. The goods are being manufactured by the job workers and it is the liability of the manufacturer to discharge the excise duty on such goods. Notification No. 214/86 prescribes a procedure by which the principal manufacturer, who got the goods manufactured by the job worker, can undertake to discharge the duty liability on such go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
