2015 (10) TMI 1777

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rudh, Advocate, for the Appellant. Ms. Shweta Bector, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER Appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 340/GRM/RTK/2005, dated 8-9-2005 which upheld the Order-in-Original No. 48-CE/2001, dated 14-9-2001 in terms of which 153 bags of Ruszyme 'G' valued at Rs. 95,628/- were confiscated (and allowed to be redeemed on fine of Rs. 15,000/-) duty demand of Rs. 2,9....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and the impugned product is an extract of the same. (iii)   Their case is covered by CESTAT judgment in case of Leeds Kem v. CCE, Aurangabad - 2001 (134) E.L.T. 294 (Tri.-Del.) and Commissioner v. Northern Minerals Ltd. - 2003 (156) E.L.T. A161 (S.C.). 4. The ld. AR contended that the literature of the product published by appellants shows that it is plant growth regulator and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....contain Cytokinin and Auxin then the preparation u/r is plant growth regulator, presence of Hormones have also been confirmed in preparation u/r in Para 3 of the forwarded literature. Forwarded literature have no mention about presence of essential fertilizing elements i.e. N, P, & K (Nitrogen, Phosphorus & Potassium)." 6. It is seen that the chemical examiner has not conducted any test....