2017 (12) TMI 217

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is April 2006 to March, 2010. 2. In both the appeals the issue is identical. So, both the appeals are disposed of together by this order for the sake of convenience. 3. The facts in narrow compass are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of tobacco product (Khaini). During the period under consideration, the Commissioner opined that in the process, the water is added to the lime so the weight has increased and appellant has not accounted for the increased weight. Finally, the department has made out a case for clandestine removal. The adjudicating authority has relied on the report of Shriram Institute for Industrial Research. For the earlier period, the assessee has gone to the Settlement Commission where the dispute was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....creasing of the weight by adding the water in the lime for manufacturing khaini. He has discussed this issue in his order in para 28 in detail. 8. However, the submission of the ld. Counsel is that the said formula was rejected by the Settlement Commission for the earlier period in the assessee's own case where it was observed that - "38. In the test reports, presence or percentage of snuff which is also admittedly an ingredient of the final product has been shown. Question arises where has the snuff gone which is not reflected in the test reports got conducted by the Revenue. It was argued on behalf of the applicant that percentage of tobacco shown in the test reports does not contain the snuff. Revenue had, however, pleaded th....