TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 1056
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate - for the appellants. Shri R.K. Manjhi, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. Per. B. Ravichandran :- These two appeals are against common impugned order dated 31/03/2015 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur. The main appellant (M/s Bhagwati Kripa Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd.) were engaged in the manufacture of Kraft paper. The main raw material is waste....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stage where paper received from Pope Reel roll is to be cut to size as per customer's requirements and the waste generated at this stage is after manufacture of finished goods and cannot be treated as manufacturing waste. It was concluded that the waste shown in the second register is nothing but goods cleared clandestinely and as such Central Excise duty was confirmed on the same. 3. The miscell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....umptive manner that waste can be allowed only in the initial pulping stage and trimming waste cannot be considered as manufacturing waste. Without having any corroborative evidence a charge of clandestine removal has been upheld, to confirm demand. 5. The learned AR reiterated the findings of the Original Authority. 6. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. We note that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the trimming of paper roll at stage two is re-fed back in the pulp mill for further manufacture. The trimming waste is not cleared. On careful analysis of the impugned order, we find that the whole demand was upheld on the basis of disallowing waste shown in register number two (Johnsons screen stage). There is no technical examination as to whether there is at all any supporting evidence to show ....