2004 (7) TMI 401

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : K.C. Mamgain, Member (T)]. -  This appeal is against the Order-in-Appeal No. 67/2001, dated 27-11-2001 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad-I. 2. Shri G. Mohan Rao, Advocate, appeared for the appellants. He pleaded that the appellants had applied to the Superintendent of Central Excise....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed that the goods cleared for re-processing are not liable for duty. He relied on the following decisions : (i)         U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. v. CCE, Allahabad - 2001 (137) E.L.T. 948 (Tri. - Del.) (ii)       Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Madras-I - 2001 (129) E.L.T. 580 (Mad.) (iii)&nbsp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be imposed by the Collector by order in writing. He stated that since the goods were not fit for marketing, therefore, no duty is demandable on these goods. 3. Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, learned SDR appearing for Revenue, stated that the appellants had removed Spaghetti for re-processing and instead of manufacturing Spaghetti out of it, they manufactured Vermicelli. Spaghetti is chargeable ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he permission that duty will not be chargeable on Spaghetti if the same is used in the manufacture of Vermicelli. According to the provisions of Rule 9(1) read with Rule 49 of Central Excise Rules, 1944, the appellants are required to discharge duty liability in case of goods removed for captive consumption; unless there exists an exemption notification for captive consumption. He said that since ....