TMI Blog2007 (12) TMI 192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r (T) Shri S. Renganathan, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri T.C. Rajadas, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - These appeals are by the assessee who, during the relevant period, was working as a small scale industrial unit. They were engaged in the manufacture of plastic film [SH 3920.32], plastic laminated film [SH 3920.38] and plastic pouches [3923.90] Plastic film and plastic laminated film were manufactured out of plastic granules and were captively consumed in the manufacture of the pouches. The appellants were availing SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/98-C.E., dated 2-6-1998 for their products, plastic film and plastic laminated film and exemption under Notification No. 5/98-C.E. dated 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble goods, whether it be pouches or films, should be taken into account while computing the aggregate value of clearance of the specified goods. The original authority demanded differential duty from the assessee for the above period and imposed on them a penalty. The appellate authority remanded the case to the lower authority after holding that the value of goods cleared by the assessee by availing the benefit of Notification No. 8/98-C.E. was not to be taken into account for computation of the aggregate value of clearances for purposes of Notification No. 5/98-C.E. The present appeal [E/470/2003] is for widening the scope of remand already ordered by learned Commissioner (Appeals). 3. We have examined the records and heard both sides ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... looked this scheme. Therefore, we are of the view that all the three appeals must be allowed by way of remand to enable the original authority to pass a composite order in adjudication of all the show-cause notices covering the entire period [2-6-1998 to 31-3-1999] after correct computation of the aggregate value of clearances of all the specified goods. It goes without saying that the assessee should be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 4. Learned counsel has relied on the Tribunal's decision in CCE, Jalandhar v. K.F. Beltings Pvt. Ltd. [2005 (181) E.L.T. 79 (Tri.-Del.)], wherein a. similar issue, which had arisen under SSI Notification No. 8/99-C.E. [successor to No. 8/98-C.E.] and a general exemption Notification No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|