2004 (8) TMI 608

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... T.K. Kar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Jain, Member (T)]. -  The present appeal filed by M/s. Metchem Metal Industries, is directed against the order No. 56/Kol-I/2003 dated 28-5-2003 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeal-I), Kolkata, wherein he has upheld the Order of the lower authority. The facts in brief are as follows :- The appellant company has manufa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al. The lower authority has classified the subject goods under SH No. 7407.12. The lower authority has confirmed the demand of duty, confiscated the seized goods under Rule 173Q with an option to the appellant company to redeem the same on payment of fine and imposed penalties in terms of Section 11AC and under Rule 173Q by charging interest under Section 11AB. The appellant company filed an appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssioner (Appeals') Order wherein the Commissioner has rejected their contention in regard to use of Borax in view of Rule 5 of the Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001. Learned Advocate has also drawn our attention to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the case of Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. Union of India & Others reported in 2004 (164) E.L.T. 372 (S.C.) = 2004 (60) RLT 3 (S.C.) wherein it....