2009 (11) TMI 381

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Appellant. Shri K. Lal, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - In these appeals filed by the assessee, the challenge is against demands of differential duty. The product in question is a combination pack (combi-pack) of toothpaste and toothbrush. The appellant was engaged, during the material period, in the manufacture of toothpaste, which was packed in prin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The assessee paid duty on the basis of MRP of Rs. 42/-. According to the Revenue, they ought to have paid duty on the basis of the combined MRP of Rs. 49/-. One of these appeals is against the differential demand of duty raised by the lower appellate authority on this basis. For the period January to March, 2000, a similar demand was raised on the assessee in respect of combi-packs of toothpaste....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....te (a) that toothpaste is admittedly an item notified under Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944, whereas toothbrush was not so notified though, in respect of both these items, there was a requirement under the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and the Rules made thereunder to declare on the package the retail sales price of the goods; (b) that toothbrush was chargeable to 'nil' rate o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....basis of the MRP at which it is sold to such consumers. He has argued that the presence of toothbrush in the combi-pack is immaterial inasmuch as it is the toothpaste which imparts the 'essential character' of the product. We find that the learned SDR has argued beyond the scope of the case made out by the Department in the show-cause notice. The show-cause notice simply demanded differential duty....