2018 (5) TMI 533

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... MADHU MOHAN DAMODAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Y. Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate for the appellant Commissioner/AR for the respondent 1. All these appeals are directed against Orders-in-Original No. 3/2013- (CE)-Commr, dt. 18.03.2013 and HYD-EXCUS-001-COM-005-14-15, dated 05.06.2014. Since all the appeals are raising the same issue, they are being disposed of by a common order. 2. The issue ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the demand of duty. The said show cause notices were adjudicated and the adjudicating authority after following due process of law, confirmed the demands raised with interest and imposed penalty on the main appellant as well as individuals. As regards the demand of duty on single micronutrient, the adjudicating has held that extended period was correctly invoked and repacking of micronutrients ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bonafide belief that the said activity of repacking will not amount to manufacture and did not discharge the duty liability as they have received single micronutrients from the manufacturers without payment of duty. He would submit that CBEC circular during the relevant period clarifies that there is no specific heading in tariff for classification of micronutrients, hence the demands raised be se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s on merits we have held that no demand of the duty can be confirmed against the main appellant. These two appeals for setting aside the personal penalties are allowed. 7. In appeal No. E/27052/2013, the issue of demand of duty on repacking of single micronutrients, classifying them under chapter 28 of Central Excise Tariff as chargeable duty seems to be correct and in consonance of the law. Th....