2006 (4) TMI 452

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y, the Misc. application is dismissed. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of chewing gum/bubble gum and were availing the benefit of CENVAT Credit in respect of inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of bubble gum including packing material. The appellants availed credit on the goods known as Boomer tattoo or printed transfers. Show cause notices were issued to the appellants denying credit in respect of Boomer tattoo on the ground that these are not inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of their final product i.e. chewing gum/bubble gum. The adjudicating authority disallowed the credit and confirmed the demand. The Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld the orders passed by the adjudicating authority. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the case of Singh Alloys & Steel Ltd. v. A.C.C.E., reported as 1993 (66) E.L.T. 594 (Cal.) to submit that the refractory material which is used in the furnace in the manufacture of ingots is entitled for the benefit of credit. The appellants also relied upon in the case of Harbans Lal Malhotra & Sons Ltd. v. CCE, Calcutta-III, reported as 2002 (149) E.L.T. 691 (Tri.-Kolkata) to submit that Hanging Cards on which are razor blades are fitted are entitled for the benefit of credit. In the case of CCE, Ahmedabad v. Paras Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. reported as 1999 (108) E.L.T. 580 the Tribunal held that Aristocrat suit cases used as secondary packing are entitled for the credit. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. CCE, Calcutta-II, reported a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Liberty Shoes Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi, reported as 2001 (135) E.L.T. 1103 (Tri.- Del.) to submit that the carry bags which are placed in card board boxes along with pair of footwear, utilized by retailers at time of sale to consumers to enable them to carry footwear cardboard box conveniently was held to be not entitled for the credit as these cannot be said to be used even indirectly for packaging card board boxes or footwear. The Revenue also relied upon in the case of G.S. Enterprises v. CCE, Jaipur, reported as 2002 (144) E.L.T. 387 (Tri. - Del.) to submit that in this case credit in respect of blades which are disposable twin blade razor as blade in question is not compatible with the....