2010 (1) TMI 548

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dharan, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.S. Katiyar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: Ashok Jindal, Member (J)]. - The appellants filed these appeals against confirmation of Central Excise duty of Rs. 43,63,410.90 and a penalty of Rs. 49,43,717/- and penalties of Rs. 5 lakhs on Shri T.S. Ramakrishnan, Vice-President of the first appellant company and Rs. 2 lakhs on Shri Sarijay V. Kha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e said activity amounts to manufacture. Periodical show-cause notices were issued. Duty demand was confirmed alongwith interest and the penalty on all the appellants were imposed. 3. Shri V. Sridharan, learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants and submitted that the activity taken over by the appellants covers the some period prior to 1997 and some period after 1997 and both the per....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hese words in the note at the relevant time was not unintentional. It would then follow that the activity under taken by the appellant would not amount to manufacture. For the period after 1997, the learned Advocate placed reliance on CCE v. BOC (I) Ltd. - 2008 (226) E.L.T. 323 (S.C.), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that it is an admitted case of the parties that the respondent only label....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mes and addresses of importers, maximum retail price, net weight etc. - No evidence of appellant's indulging in any further activity which required packing or repacking of bulk packing into retail packs within extended meaning of 'manufacture' and held that the said activity does not amount to manufacture. The learned Advocate further submitted that in the instant case also the appellants are enga....