2005 (12) TMI 28

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Central Excise (Appeals), Coimbatore. 2. Shri A.J.K. Nambiar, learned Advocate appeared for the appellants and Shri K.S. Reddy, learned JDR appeared for the Revenue. 3. The issue involved is whether package tea bearing a brand name manufactured prior to 2-6-98 but removed from the factory after 2-6-1998 is liable to pay duty, in view of the fact that only with effect from 2-6-98, a Chapter N....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. - 1996 (83) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). (c) Ganesh Extrusion Artistries v. CCE - 1993 (66) E.L.T. 639 (Tri.). 5. We do not agree with the contention of the learned Advocate. Prior to 2-6-98, the tariff entry under 0902.00 was "Tea including tea waste", the rate of duty was nil. This indicates that even prior to 2-6-98, tea was excisable. That means even package tea in unit co....