2001 (8) TMI 1127

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Section 11AC of the Act of Rs. 4,00,480/- and of Rs. 50,000/- under Rule 173Q of the Rules. 2. The facts giving rise to the appeal may briefly be stated as under :- The proceedings were initiated against the appellants on the strength of the show cause notice dated 26-2-99 issued by the Deputy Commissioner wherein it was alleged that they received certain inputs in the containers which were to be used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. They after taking out those inputs from the containers/packing materials, disposed of the same without paying any duty during the years 1994-95 to 1997-98. They were, therefore, required to show cause as to why the amount in question should not be recovered from them for havin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ime and to substantiate this ground, the learned Counsel referred to the Board's Circular Nos. B-22/39/86-TRU, dated 5-9-86 and 449/15/99-CX, dated 23-3-99 and argued that there was no suppression of material facts from the excise department when the Board itself had clarified that empty containers when cleared from the factory would not be chargeable to duty only vide Circular No. 449/15/99-CX, dated 23-3-99. 6. On the other hand, the learned SDR has reiterated the findings in the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals). He has argued that containers/packing materials had been removed and cleared by the appellants from the factory and as such they had been rightly held to be liable for payment of duty. 7. We have heard....