TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Pvt. Ltd. and others [2016 (9) TMI 678 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD] held that, there was no evidence to prove that sugar syrup captively consumed is classifiable under Tariff Item No. 17029090 nor there is any evidence to prove that the goods in question in the form in which they come into existence in the appellants’ factory are marketable and finally held that Sugar syrup coming into existence during t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ahabad. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the appellant is a manufacturer of biscuits and persons associated with the same. During the manufacture of biscuit, sugar syrup gets prepared to be used in making of biscuits. It appeared to Revenue that sugar syrup was classifiable under Tariff Item No.17029090. Prior to 03.05.2007 the final products manufactured by the appellant were attractin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore Learned Commissioner (Appeals). Learned Commissioner (Appeals) through Order-in-Appeal decided the said appeal. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the above stated Order-in-Appeal upheld the Order-in-Original. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant is before this Tribunal. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant who has submitted that the issue is no more res-integra in view of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relied on decision by Coordinate Bench in the case of Rishi Bakers Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur decided through Final Order Nos.50759-50764/2015 dated 03.03.2015 reported at 2015 (378) E.L.T. 634 (Tri. Del.) and held that there was no evidence to prove that sugar syrup captively consumed is classifiable under Tariff Item No.17029090 nor there is any evidence to prove that the goods in question in the form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
