TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (7) TMI 369
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 8,42,000/- on them. He has also directed that the interest at the applicable rate is to be charged from the party under Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944. The parry filed an appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals), New Delhi vide his order dated 10-1-2002 - but for reducing the penalty of Rs. 2,10,000/- and setting aside the interest - otherwise rejected the appeal of the party. 2. M/s. W.G. Maurya Shertaon Hotel & Towers and the Revenue - both are in appeal against the impugned Order of Commissioner (Appeals). M/s. Maurya Shertaon Hotel & Towers have filed a stay petition for waiver of the balance of the duty amount of Rs. 2,40,949.00 and the penalty of Rs. 2,10,000/- confirmed on them by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is on re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... them during the period from 1-9-93 to 28-2-97 and why a penalty of equal amount should not be imposed on them under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 and Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. They were also called upon to show cause why the interest should not be charged from them under Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944. After considering the case of the party, the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I in his order dated 26-2-99 has confirmed a duty of Rs. 8,40,949/- on the appellants under the provisions of Rule 9(2) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11A(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944. He has observed that since the party has already made a payment of Rs. 5.50 lakhs on 12-12-97, this amount is a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., chocolates and cookies being placed under sub-heading No. 1905.21, No. 1803.00 and under sub-heading No. 1905.11 respectively. He also does not contest the value of the goods cleared by them during the period from 1-9-93 to 21-12-97 assessed by the authorities and in respect of which the demand of duty is made on them since the value of the goods cleared during this period is furnished by the appellants themselves. He further does not question the rate of duty made applicable to these products and the resultant quantification of the amount of duty. He, however, submits that in respect of the chocolates falling under sub-heading 1803.00, no process of manufacture is undertaken since they have been buying chocolates in bulk and in bars from....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... into smaller pieces is the process which renders the chocolates marketable to consumer and shall amount to manufacture in terms of Chapter note No. 3 to Chapter 18. To this contention of the ld. SDR, the ld. Counsel for the appellants makes the reply that this Chapter note will apply only to the cases where the goods are not already marketable and are subjected to labelling, relabelling and repacking etc. It is contended that since the appellants are buying chocolate in bulk quantity which is already marketable and further subjecting it to the process of cutting and adding dry fruits and nuts etc., the same would not be covered within mischief of this chapter note. This contention of the ld. Counsel for the appellants, if accepted, will re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the levy of duty on the goods manufactured by them. The ignorance of the legal provisions is no support for the plea of bona fide belief. The Central Excise duty was imposed on the cakes and pastries in the Budge of 1997 but even on these products, they did not pay duty the demand for which is restricted for a period from 1-3-97 to 21-12-97. The chocolates etc. are subject to levy of duty under sub-heading No. 1803.00 right since September, 1993. The bona fide belief is a question of fact to be determined in the facts and circumstances of each case. In this case, there is no evidence to support the argument of bona fide belief. The contention of the party in this regard therefore, cannot be admitted. The extended period of demand in this ....