2010 (11) TMI 331

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urther benefits. 2. Heard both sides extensively. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the respondent is a manufacturer of VP sugar and molasses. During the season 1999-2000, they re-processed left over brown sugar of season 1997-98, 1998-99 and also scrap sugar and jelly of season 1998-99; similarly they reprocessed brown sugar and scrap sugar of season 1999-2000 during the season 2000-01 and the left over brown sugar and scrap sugar of 2000-01 in season 2001-02 etc. Show cause notice dated 24-1-05 was issued alleging that there was less recovery of sugar reprocessed during 5 sugar seasons namely, 1999-2000 to 2003-2004. It was alleged in the show cause notice that the quantity reprocessed was 35,390 Qtls. and quantity of sugar ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cate pointed out that the department has taken note of payment of duty of Rs. 6,25,900/- on 12518 Qtls. of molasses. He also submits that as rightly noted by the Commissioner (Appeals), the emergences of brown sugar, scarp sugar were evident from periodical returns submitted to the department in the form of RT -7 (c) and RT 8(c). He also claimed that demand is also hit by time bar. He seeks upholding the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 5.2 He also submits that the so called brown sugar is not marketable as such and it consists of recoverable sugar and molasses in different proportions. Drawing my attention to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Bharat Sugar Mills case reported in 1994 (69) E.L.T. 686, he submits that th....