Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2017 (9) TMI 1060

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rch, 1986. 2. The brief facts as per the show cause notice dated 09 March, 2006 is that the appellants are engaged in production of various grade of Attars falling under Chapter 33 of CETA, 1985 and it is alleged that they have wrongly availed exemption benefit under Notification No. 214/86 CE and cleared the goods without payment of duty amounting to Rs. 4,61,33,313/- as leviable thereon in contravention of the Rules read with Section 11 A of the Act. Upon scrutiny of the documents resumed etc. and the process of manufacture of said goods was examined critically to see as to whether the said process is covered under the definition of job work and as to whether the exemption under Notification No.214/86-CE was available in respect of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e and the transaction as well as the billing pattern that the appellant was not undertaking job work, but were selling the product. Accordingly, for the period 1st January, 2005 to 23rd February, 2006 it was proposed to levy duty. Subsequently corrected by corrigendum to 1st February, 2005 to 31st January, 2006, demanding an amount of Rs. 4,61,33,313/- towards duty adjustment not paid along with interest and further penalty under Rule 27 was proposed. Further, the partner of the appellant firm Shri Achal Gupta was also required to show cause why not penalty be imposed under Rule 26 of CER, 2002. The SCN was adjudicated vide Order-in-Original dated 17 July, 2007, wherein the proposed demand was confirmed with interest and further penalty Rs.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....all the necessary details are required for engaging the appellant for job work. We also find that the appellant herein also vide their letter dated 15 April, 2004 informed the Superintendent of the range in response to his query dated 13 April, 2004 informing that the goods sent by the principal manufacturer of sandalwood oils and other essential oils falling under Tariff Heading 3301, as has been mentioned in their declaration under Notification No. 214/86-CE. Further stating that they will not be manufacturing the above said basic raw materials, but the same is supplied by the principal manufacturer and they will only be making a thorough masala of the same by undertaking certain process like act was distillation and sending it back to th....