2005 (1) TMI 517

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt. Shri Ramakrishnappa, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. -  This is an appeal against OIA No. 588/02-C.E., dated 3-10-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bangalore. The appellants manufacture P & P which are excisable . They removed 2,38,050 vials of Benzyl Penicillin at Nil rate of duty vide invoice dated 26-5-98. The goods....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri Chidanand Urs learned Advocate appeared for the appellants and Shri R.V. Ramakrishnappa, learned JDR appeared for the Department. 3. The learned Advocate urged that the entire demand is time barred as the audit note was issued on 12-4-99 and the show cause notice was issued on 7-8-2000. There is no justification for invoking the extended period as the appellants have given D-3 intimatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the present case repacking of goods from bulk to retail was completed even at the time of original removal. At that time, the manufacturing process was complete. The goods were returned only to remove the defective labels and for relabelling. Hence, during the second instance no manufacture took place and 173H clearly applies to them. Hence demand of duty is not justified. It was further urged th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he advocate is clearly applicable in this case. When the goods were originally removed, at that time there was re-packing from bulk pack to retail packs and also labelling. But when the goods were returned for removing the defective labels, there was merely relabelling. We agree with the learned Advocate that only when relabelling follows re-packing, the process amounts to manufacture. While inter....