2018 (5) TMI 482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hnical) Shri P. Juneja, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the appellant Shri Manish Saharan, Advocate - for the respondent ORDER Per. Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra The present appeal is filed by the Department against order-in-Appeal No. IND/CEX/000/APP/160/ 2013 dated 01/11/2013. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a proprietary firm and engaged in the wor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....denying the benefit of Notification No. 8/2005-ST is that while carrying out the activity in the respondent's factory, the respondent has used some of the raw materials such as rubber lining from their own account which was not supplied by M/s Grasim Industries Limited. Accordingly, the Department has taken the view that since such goods are produced not exclusively using the raw material supplied....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the said Finance Act : Provided that the said exemption shall apply only in cases where such goods are produced using raw materials or semi-finished goods supplied by the client and goods so produced are returned back to the said client for use in or in relation to manufacture of any other goods falling under the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986), as amend....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nts. The proviso does not specify that the goods should be produced only using the raw materials or semi-finished goods supplied by the clients. There is no dispute in the present case that the semifinished goods was supplied by M/s Grasim Industries Limited on such goods. The activity of rubber lining has been carried out. It is also evident that the activity carried out by the respondent in thei....