2015 (11) TMI 244

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and miscellaneous edible preparations falling under Chapter 33, 30 and 21 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants, in addition to their own products also manufacture branded goods pertaining to various companies. In respect of their own products, they were availing the benefit of SSI Notification No.8/2003-CE dt. 01/03/2003 as amended, during the period April 2007 to January 2008 and February 2008 to March 2008. The appellants have one more unit at Baddi, Himachal Pradesh engaged in the manufacture of branded goods pertaining to various companies. The said goods are exempt from payment of duty by virtue of Notification Nos.49 & 50/2003-CE dt. 10/06/2003 which are area specific exemptions. The case made out against the appella....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of clearances of all excisable goods for home consumption. Paragraph 4 denies exemption to specified goods bearing a brand name or trade name of another person and reads as under:- 4. The exemption contained in this notification shall not apply to specified goods bearing a brand name or trade name, whether registered or not, of another person, except in the following cases: -  (a) where the specified goods, being in the nature of components or parts of any machinery or equipment or appliances, are cleared for use as original equipment in the manufacture of the said machinery or equipment or appliances by following the procedure laid down in the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aking them out of purview of the SSI exemption notification. In the impugned order, Commissioner has taken a view that if the branded goods enjoy the SSI benefit by satisfying conditions in para 4, their value should be taken into consideration. There cannot be any dispute about this observation. However, he has taken a view that viewed in the context that if the items are covered by paragraph 4, their value has to be taken into account for the purpose of arriving at aggregate value of clearances of Rs. 1.5 crores or Rs. 4 crores, the value of such goods has to be taken into account. According to learned Commissioner, the intention is to charge duty on branded goods exception being paragraph 4. It is his view that since the appellants did n....