2014 (7) TMI 226

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hibaran, Addl. Comm. (AR), for the Appellant. Shri D.H. Nadkarni, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. CEX.IX/JMJ/328/916/ APL/NSK/2004, dated 13-8-2004 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Nashik. 2. The respondent, M/s. General Metallisers Ltd. is a manufacturer of Metallised Paper/Pa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Act, 1944 along with interest thereon under Section 11AB ibid and also proposing to impose penalty under Section 11AC. Notice was adjudicated and demands were confirmed. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant approached the lower appellate authority, who came to the conclusion that the place of removal remains the factory and therefore, the appellant is not liable to pay excise duty on the freight....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 is warranted in the instant case and therefore, the impugned order is bad in law. 4. The ld. Counsel for the respondent on the other hand submits that the impugned order has been correctly passed as there is no dispute about the place of removal which remains the factory gate. Only in a few cases at the request of the customers, the goods were delivered at the....