9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1397X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether the sugar confectionery falling under chapter heading under 1704.90 and 1804.90 being manufactured by the appellant, the individual piece weighing less than 10 grams per piece and the same are packed in 500 grams pack whether such product is liable to be valued on MRP basis under Section 4 A or under Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944. 2 On 09.05.2024, in the appeal No. E/11541/2017 & E/11545/2017, when the matter was called out a letter from Advocate on record Shri Dhaval K Shah dated 08.05.2024 along with judgment in the appellant's own case has been placed before the bench. In the said letter, he requested to decide the matter in the light of this Tribunal's decision in the appellant's own case. For the remaining appeals Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is reproduced below:- "06. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the records. The revenue's appeal is only on the ground that by amendment dated 13.01.2007 in Rule 2(j) of the SWM (PC) Rules, 1977 the earlier judgment in the appellant's own company is distinguished. In this regard, we reproduce Rule 34 (b) which has prevailed prior to 13.01.2007 and subsequent to that which reads as under:- Before 13.01.2007 Rule 34. Exemption in respect of certain packages Nothing contained in these rules shall apply to any package containing a commodity if,- (a)....... (b) the net weight or measure of the commodity is twenty grams or twenty mililitres or less, if sold by weight or measure. After 13.01.2007 Rule 34. Ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e do not find any adverse effect in the principle of law on the issue in hand laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Despite the substitution of Rule 2(j), the provision of Rule 34(b) of SWM (PC) Rules, 1977 remain intact, according to which there is no requirement for affixing/printing retail sale price on the package of the goods of less than 10 gram therefore, we do not find any substance in the revenue's appeal. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme court in the appellant's own case shall continue to be applicable in the present case also. The relevant order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the appellant's own case is reproduced below:- 2. In view of the order of this Court dated 15th September, 2008, dismissing CA. No. 7559 of 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tertain the appeal. The same is dismissed accordingly, keeping open the question of law sought to be raised in the appeal. In view of the above order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the issue is no more res-integra accordingly, the revenue's appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5.3 As regard the assessee's appeal, wherein they have challenged the confirmation of demand by the adjudicating authority under Section 11D, we find that though the appellant have raised invoice showing the total excise duty in terms of Section 4A but since the differential duty demand i.e. between Section 4 and Section 4A was not sustained, the same was held to have been collected by the assessee from their customer accordingly, the demand was confirmed under Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid to the credit of the Central Government under [sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A), as the case may be,] and which has not been so paid, the Central Excise Officer may serve, on the person liable to pay such amount, a notice requiring him to show cause why the said amount, as specified in the notice, should not be paid by him to the credit of the Central Government. (3) The Central Excise Officer shall, after considering the representation, if any, made by the person on whom the notice is served under subsection (2), determine the amount due from such person (not being in excess of the amount specified in the notice) and thereupon such person shall pay the amount so determined. (4) The amount paid to the credit of the Central Gover ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation of Section 11D in the facts of the present case therefore, the demand confirmed under Section 11D cannot be sustained. 06. As a result, revenue's appeal no. E/1273/2011 is dismissed and assessee's appeal no. E/1234/2011 is allowed." 5. In view of the above decision which is based on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the appellant's own case, the issue is no longer res- integra, therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable, hence, the same is set aside and appeals are allowed." 6. In view of the above decision in the appellant's own case the issue is no longer res-integra. Therefore, following the same the impugned orders are not sustainable and the same are set aside. Appeals are allowed. ( Pronounced in the open cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
