2015 (1) TMI 983

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....msp;Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the activity of importing and trading of goods like perfumes, shampoos, body spray, fruit juice based drinks, etc., falling under Chapters 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 33 and 85 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CETA, 85). The goods imported by the appellant are required to pay duty on MRP basis as per Section 3 of the CETA, 85. As the appellant was fixing sticker in their warehouse after clearance of the goods by discharging duty on the basis of MRP less abatement, the Revenue issued a show cause notice to the appellant on the premise the activity of fixing stickers amounts to manufacture as per Section 2(f)(iii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore, the goods were sei....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s, the learned Advocate prays that the impugned order is required to be set aside. 5.1 With regard to the issue of revenue neutrality, the learned advocate relies on the decision in the case of BASF India Ltd. v. CCE - 2009 (245) E.L.T. 381 (Tri.-Ahmd.) = 2011 (22) S.T.R. 359 (T) and also on the decision in the case of L'Oreal India Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 6. On the other hand, the learned AR opposes the contentions of the learned Counsel and submits that the main issue in this case is that whether putting MRP stickers in their private warehouse amounts to manufacture or not. Admittedly as per the Section 2(f)(iii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 the said activity amounts to manufacture. Therefore, the show cause notice has rightly b....