2018 (3) TMI 63

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t Shri Mohd Altaf (Asstt. Commr.) AR - for Respondent ORDER Per: Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against impugned order, wherein the value of coating is proposed to be included in the assessable value. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is manufacturing the Polyester Film. The activity of the appellant is that they are metalizing the polyester film and selling in th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ported at 2006 (193) E.L.T. 6 (S.C.). The matter was adjudicated it was held that in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddhartha Tubes (supra), the value of coating is to be included in the assessable value, therefore, the differential duty was demanded alongwith interest and equal amount of penalty was also imposed. Against the said order, the appellant is before us. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cture and the metalized polyester film has been cleared by the appellant on payment of duty, therefore, the appellant is not required pay duty on coating as it is separate process undertaken by the appellant, further the coating does not amount to manufacture. Therefore, the facts of the case are distinguishable from the decision of the Siddhartha Tubes' (supra) case. Therefore the impugned order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X