2012 (10) TMI 928

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Respondent. ORDER This appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 30-6-2005 whereby he set aside the order-in-original dated 31-1-2005 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and dropped the duty demand of Rs. 63,750/- with interest. 2. Briefly stated the facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that the appellants are engaged in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondent being aggrieved of the aforesaid order preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide impugned order-in-appeal took the view that the Department had not been able to show that any illicit clearance of standard sugar and that lost sugar during reprocessing of damaged sugar could not be subjected to Excise duty. Thus, he accepted the appeal and set aside the order-in-original.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is that a quantity of 10821 Qtls of sugar manufactured by the appellant got damaged before it could be sold in the market as a result reprocessing was undertaken to make sugar marketable and in the course of reprocessing 750 Qtls of sugar was lost. If we go by these facts, it is obvious 750 Qtls of sugar regarding which the Revenue has claimed Excise duty was not removed/marketed by the respondent....