2004 (11) TMI 361

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....shnappa, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - This appeal has been filed against the OIA No. 152/2001, dated 16-8-2001 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad. There are two issues to be decided in this appeal. 2. Issue No. 1 : The appellants are the manufacturers of Filters and Filter elements availing SSI benefit under relev....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ads as follows : "No such waste as is referred to in clause (i) is required to be returned to the factory of the manufacturer of final products if the excise duty payable on such waste is paid". 3. The Revenue contends that the 'excise duty payable' means payable by the appellant and not by the job worker. The appellants contend that CBEC, in its Circular No. 56/56/94-CX-8, dated 14-9-1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hould be adopted. Hence, on this point, the OIA is not correct and, therefore, we allow the appeal and set aside the demand. 6. Issue No 2 : The issue is whether the value of impregnated filter paper received from the job worker and cleared for captive consumption and to sister units, is includible in the aggregate value of the clearances of the appellants' unit who avail the benefit of SS....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r No. 57/88, dated 27-10-1988 according to which, the value of the inputs cleared as such under 57F(1)(ii) is not includible in the aggregate value of clearances of a small scale manufacturer. This has not been accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals) as the impregnated filter paper cannot be considered as inputs removed as such and the above mentioned Board's Circular is not applicable. We find tha....