2016 (12) TMI 585

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Advocates for the Appellant (s) Shri V.R. Reddy Asstt. Commissioner (A.R.) for the Department Per Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar: The present appeal is preferred against Order-in-Appeal No.197-CE/MRT-I/2005 dated 28.11.2005 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Customs & Central Excise, Meerut. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturer of Inverted Syrup and edible pre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Organics/67/2001/193 dated 27.03.2003, wherein the appellants were called upon to show cause as to why Central Excise duty realized Rs. 528/-, 4890/-, 1,18,891/- should not be appropriated. Further, they were called upon show cause as to why Central Excise duty of Rs. 76,144/- on the amount of Rs. 4,75,899/- realized from various companies as handling, forwarding & packing charges during the per....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eriod from 1998-99 to 2001-02 realized on account of such packing, Central Excise duty of Rs. 76,144/- was confirmed by the original authority and original authority imposed penalty of Rs. 1,98,750/- on the appellant under Rules 173 Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2001. 3. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original dated 21.09.2000, the appellant preferred an a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ested the issue of durable and returnable packing and also that of imposition of penalty. The grounds of appeal are that the charges on which duty was not paid were the charges for durable and returnable packing such as drums and canes and assessable value was not admissible to include the same as per the Law existed during the relevant period. 5. Heard learned counsel. He has contested that th....