2017 (12) TMI 148

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... manufactured packaging materials for M/s Hindustan Lever Limited but it was not lifted by M/s Hindustan Lever Limited, and compensation was paid to the Appellant for non lifting of the material which includes excise duty totally amounting to Rs. 15,24,742/-.The appellant has claimed to have destroyed the said packing materials and out of the total duty liability of Rs. 2,13,926/- payable on the said packing material, reversed an amount of Rs. 1,49,747/- as credit availed on the inputs used in the manufacture of said packing materials. Alleging that the appellant is required to pay the duty involved on such packing material, the differential duty of Rs. 64,178/- was demanded with interest and penalty by issuing a Show Cause Notice dated 11.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the packaging material, not lifted by M/s Hindustan Lever Limited. It is the contention of the appellant that they are entitled to remission of duty of Rs. 2,13,926/-, subject to reversal of the credit availed on the inputs used in the manufacture of such packing materials as per Rule 3(5C) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It is their contention that application under Rule 21 is a mere procedural one and in absence of such application duty cannot be confirmed against them. I do not find merit in the contention of the appellant inasmuch as levy of excise duty is on the goods manufactured, however its collection is postponed till its removal from the factory in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shaw Wallace Co. Ltd. Vs Deputy....