2007 (3) TMI 53

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the order of the Commissioner No. 07/Dem/2002, dated 18-2-2002. M/s. Mahalaxmi Exports is the appellant in Appeal No. E/1802/02 and the department is the appellant in Appeal No. E/736/03. 2. Heard the learned SDR for the department, none appeared on behalf of M/s. Mahalaxmi Exports in spite of notice. Perused the records. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows :- (a) M/s. Mahalaxmi Exp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cture of said finished goods (which are waste and rejects) are also demandable and accordingly proposed demand of duty and penal action. (e) The Commissioner vide his order referred above confirmed excise duty of Rs. 4,73,654/- on the waste and rejects as finished products and imposed penalty of Rs. 1.2 lakhs. He, however, held the view that demand of duty on raw materials used in the manufacture....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder and he relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sanju Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2004 (163) E.L.T. 217 (Tri.-Mum.). This submission is acceptable 5. As regards the department's appeal relating to the demand of duty on the inputs which have gone into manufacture of waste and rejects, he submits that the goods have been cleared in violation of Section 72 (d) of the Cu....