TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (9) TMI 259
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh, who has found that the product, "preparation of Maltose and Dextrose" in which the reducing sugar (expressed as anhydrous) amounts to less than 50% by weight is not marketable and hence not excisable - according to the Depart....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entral Excise, Vadodara reported in 1999 (105) E.L.T. 573 (Tribunal) = 1999 (30) RLT 792, in which maltodextrin solution (hydrolysed starch) has been held to be non-marketable and hence not excisable, following the Apex Court decision in the case of Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises reported in 1989 (43) E.L.T. 214 (S.C.). The claim of the respondents herein that their product is hydrolysed starch (obt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, as what was purchased was maltodextrin solution, which had a solid content of over 75%; while the solid content in the disputed product has been found to be between 50 to 51%. The reliance placed by the learned DR on sale of maltodextrin by M/s. Lakshmi Starch does not advance the plea of the Revenue since M/s. Lakshmi Starch marketed maltodextrin in powder form and not solution form. Learned D....