Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether parts of cigarette packets, namely slides and slits, were excisable goods, and whether the appellate orders deserved to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision in view of the absence of specific findings on manufacture and marketability.
Analysis: The controversy turned on whether the goods answered the definition of excisable goods under the tariff. The earlier appellate orders did not record a specific finding on the process of manufacture, and the finding on marketability was not based on a proper evidentiary appraisal. Although the excisability plea had not been taken in the reply to the show cause notice, it had been raised before the appellate authority and the Tribunal without objection as to maintainability. In these circumstances, the proper course was to afford both sides an opportunity to lead evidence and to have the matter decided afresh by the appellate authority.
Conclusion: The appeals were allowed, the impugned orders were set aside, and the matters were remanded for fresh disposal.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a material excisability issue has not been specifically adjudicated and the existing findings are not supported by a proper evidentiary determination, the matter may be remanded for fresh consideration after allowing the parties to adduce evidence.