2007 (1) TMI 583

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....SDR ORDER PER M. VEERAIYAN : This appeal is against the order of the Commissioner No. 35 to 47/ COMMR/2004 dated 31.12.2004. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows: a. The appellant company are manufacturers of dutiable products like Dextrose, Anhydrous Dextrose, Liquid Glucose, Sorbitol, etc., and also products which are either subject to nil ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Commissioner has taken the view that Hydrochloric Acid and Caustic Soda Lye are fuel and dropped proceedings in respect of the four show cause notices relating to the demand of duty on starch. However, in respect of the nine show cause notices relating to demand of duty on the bye-products he confirmed the duty. d. According to the appellants in respect of these show cause notices, ther....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e proceedings have been dropped in respect of four show cause notices and the department has not come in appeal against the dropping of those four show cause notices and therefore they should be given the same benefit in respect of other nine show cause notices as well. In other words, he wants the Tribunal to accept the view and the finding that caustic soda lye and hydrochloric acid as fuel. He,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....05 (188) ELT 497 (Tri.-Mumbai) f. Franco Italian Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai-17, 2000 (40) RLT 295 (CEGAT-LB)=2000 (120) ELT 720 (Tri.-LB) g. Tube Investments of India Ltd. vs. CCE, Madurai, 2002 (52) RLT 444 (CEGAT-Che.)=2004 (177) ELT 880 (Tri.-Chennai) 6. We have carefully considered the submissions. We are convinced that the demand is highly disproportionate to the credi....