TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 78
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n impugned order, all the three appeals are disposed of by this common order. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a 100% EOU and is engaged in the manufacture of spice oleoresins, decaffeinated tea, instant tea and food colours which are exported to foreign countries. Apart from export, the appellant is also selling a small portion of spice oleoresins / instant tea to DTA buyers and is availing CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Department entertained a doubt that the appellants are manufacturing both dutiable and exempted goods and are rendering exempted service but not maintained separate accounts and have not followed Rule 6 of the CCR and issued show-cause notice for various periods demand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....accounts. The invoices and other documents produced along with appeals were sufficient to show that separate accounts were maintained by various units and these documents were available with the original authority also as is clear from the show-cause notice itself. But the appellate Commissioner has not given any findings on the said issue and therefore the said order suffers from infirmity of nonconsideration of the grounds raised in the appeals. He further submitted that error in computation pointed out by the appellant in the appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) was under two heads; (i) on the non-exclusion of high sea sales for computing the value of traded goods and (ii) the mistake in the figures while reckoning the value of electr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....missioner(Appeals) has not considered all the grounds raised by the appellant in their appeals. further I find that the computation error committed in the original order was sought to be rectified by the appellant by way of production of Chartered Accountant certificate and the same was denied on the ground that additional evidence cannot be produced before the appellate authority by resorting to provisions of Rule 5(1) of the Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001. Further I find that there is no restriction under law for raising the additional issue / grounds in the appeal, if the same has a bearing on the taxability of the assessee and in this regard, I find that the law is well settled in the case of Metchem Metal Industries and Tata Iron....