2001 (4) TMI 658

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri J. Singh, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  The appellants filed these appeals against the Order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of aerated water. The excise officers visited the factory of the appellants and 2,92,270 crown corks of various brand names were found short. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erated water. He submits that the appellants are getting concentrate to manufacture aerated water and there is no evidence to show that they had received concentrate to manufacture such quantity of bottles of aerated water. He also relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of C.C.E v. Ludhiana Bottling Co. reported in [1997 (93) E.L.T. 177 (Tribunal)] and submits that in this case the T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tain quantity of crown corks and the duty is demanded on the ground that the crown corks are used in the manufacture of aerated water, which was cleared without payment of duty. There is no other evidence in respect of other raw-materials used in the manufacture of such quantity of aerated water. The Tribunal in the case of C.C.E v. Ludhiana Bottling Co. (supra), after relying upon the earlier dec....