Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2002 (5) TMI 692

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g duty on the aluminium bottle, waste and scrap of aluminium and condensers cleared from the factory between 1-3-1986 to 29-2-1988 amounting to Rs. 13,02,580.63. The show cause notice alleged that the Appellants had manufactured these goods without payment of duty and without cover of a valid document, did not account excisable goods in statutory records nor filed returns or classification list and price list and that they suppressed the fact that they had manufactured excisable goods with intend to evade payment of duty. 2. The appellants constituting the notice on the grounds of - (a)     The demand is barred by limitation as the Department was well aware of the facts. (b)     The processes ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Preventive Officers and after consideration this detained article were released by an order dated 5-5-1983, by holding that the case of charging duty did not arise on such goods. Declarations were filed indicating the activities vide various notifications. From these documents on record, we find that the activity of the appellant was in the knowledge of the department and allegation of suppression cannot be upheld. Therefore, the appellants plea that they carried on identical activity, as the erstwhile company, under a bona fide belief that the activity carried on does not amount of manufacture is a valid plea of bona fide belief. The Appellant have also taken out a licence under protest on 1-3-1988 as has been reported in the impugned ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e plea that the process employed should not be considered to bring in the levy under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. We cannot uphold the plea. The process is not undertaken on Blanks, as alleged in notice, but on what are duty paid 'Rounded Bottles' a container with cylindrical shape and one side closed as demonstrated which is used for storing pesticides, tablets/powder & closed with plastic disc stoppers. The final products emerging are tapered narrow neck Aluminium Bottles with/without threads which are closed by Bungs/Screw on caps & used for storing oils/liquids medicines etc. The new definition of manufacture, applicable, in this case, contains specific clauses, instead of setting out the activities & Clause (iii) simply s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xcise once again. Since no other plea on challenge to the findings of the Commissioner was made. In the case before us we find that the main plea of the assessee before the lower authority was that Aluminium Metal container which was duty paid and received by them were converted into another kind of Aluminium container which remain classified under the same chapter sub-heading prior to conversion and after conversion and hence not liable to pay any duty. This cannot be upheld in view of the admitted position that the threaded/unthreaded bottles with taper end were intended for use of containing liquids and are different, therefore different identifiable goods, tapered bottles will not be supplied when the order is placed for rounded bottles....