TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 566
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cking Machines ( Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2010 under Notification No. 11/2010-CE (NT) dated 27.02.2010 as amended for non-production of chewing tobacco. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Barasat Division sanctioned the abatement due to non-production of chewing tobacco ( other than filter Khaini ) without lime tube and lime pouches. Revenue filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the Orders of the Adjudicating authority. By the impugned Orders the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Adjudication Orders. Hence, the Revenue filed these appeals. 2. Heard the Learned A/R for the Revenue, none appears on behalf of the Respondent Assessee. 3. After hearing the Learned A/R and perusal for th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he above mentioned period against which said abatement was sought no manufacturing activity, whatsoever, in respect of the aforesaid notified goods was undertaken by them and (2) that during the said period no removal of the said notified goods was reflected by them except that such notified goods already produced before the commencement of the said period was removed with the first two days of the said period . Similarly references of similar certificates of the Jurisdictional Superintendent are there in page 3 of the second and the third impugned Order-in-Original. I also find that the respondents have paid the monthly duty payable on the notified goods for the months involved in all these cases in due time. 8. Now coming to the issues ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roduciton of goods under Rule 10 ibid and find that the name of the manufacturer of each of the packing machine, its identification number, date of its purchase and the maximum packing speed at which they can be operated for packing of pouches of notified goods with retail sale prices was mentioned therein as required under Rule 6 of the Rules ibid. The bogey of not furnishing the required details of the machine is totally misconceived and cannot be accepted in the given facts and circumstances of the case, more so when the entire exercise of sealing and un-installation took place under the physical supervision of the Departmental officers. Therefore, there is absolutely no room or scope for the respondents to deceive the Department as alle....