2002 (9) TMI 628

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d contravention of Central Excise Rules by the appellant. Appeal allowed with partial relief". 2. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) further held, "As regards the issue on limitation, I find that the appellant had placed sufficient evidence on record for information of the Department, so no cause existed for invocation of extended period". 3. Being aggrieved by the order regarding imposition of penalty u/r 173Q the assessee has filed the Appeal No. E/1247/2002-NB. Being aggrieved by the order of not sustaining demand of duty Revenue has filed the Appeal No. E/1135/2002-D. 4. Since both the appeals arise out of the same impugned order they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 5. The facts of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ess of dyeing, printing, bleaching, mercerising, twisting, doubling, multiple-folding, cabling, or any other process, or any one of these processes, or the conversion of any form of the said products into another form of such products shall amount to manufacture". It was contended on the basis of the contents of the above Notes that the assessee did not undertake any of the processes inasmuch as they only repacked the goods and cleared them without payment of duty. After hearing the Additional Commissioner confirmed the demand of duty and imposed a penalty equal to the amount of duty on the assessee u/s 11AC and Rs. 4.0 lac u/r 173Q of the C. Ex. Rules, 1944. 7. Arguing the case for the assessee Shri K.K. Anand, learned Counsel submit....