2017 (11) TMI 471

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f biscuits and used sugar syrup which was prepared within their factory. The appellant has claimed the exemption of the excise duty under Notification No.67/1995-CE dated 16/03/1995 which was denied by the Department. Being aggrieved present appeal is being filed by the assessee. 3. Heard Shri Jatin Mahajan, learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri M.R. Sharma, learned AR for the Revenue and perused the appeal record. 4. After hearing both the sides, it appears that the identical matter had come up before this Tribunal in the case of Lucky Biscuit Company vs. CCE, Patna vide final order No.76068-76071 of 2017 dated 14/06/2017, wherein it was observed that:- "5. We find that the issue in the present case is whether sugar syrup made by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as "sugar syrup blend" in this sub-heading the product must contain 50% by weight of fructose sugar in dry state. In these cases, the appellant's plea from the very beginning has been that the fructose sugar content is less than 50% and in this regard they have produced the test report of Shriram Institute of Industrial Research. It is seen that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not given any finding on this plea. Not only this, there is no evidence to show that before seeking classification of the goods, in question, under subheading 1702 90 90, the samples drawn from the goods had been got tested by the CRCL to confirm as to whether the fructose content of the goods, in question, in dry stage is 50% by weight. Just because the appellant dur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....New Delhi (supra) has held that the test of marketability is whether product is marketable in condition in which it emerges. In this regard the marketability of the goods produced by a particular manufacturer cannot be presumed on the basis of the marketability of the similar goods in different condition being produced by another manufacturer, unless it shown that the two products are identical. In these cases, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the goods, in question, to be marketable only on the basis that the "invert sugar syrup" being manufactured by M/s. Dhampur Speciality Sugars Ltd. is being sold to M/s. Britannia Industries, M/s. J.B. Mangaram Food Industries and M/s. ITC Ltd. In our view this basis of holding that the goods, ....