2021 (11) TMI 894

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Blended Petrol, falling under Chapter Heading 27101119 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The case of the Department is that during the disputed period, the appellant had manufactured 156KL of 10% Ethanol Blended Petrol, but did not discharge the duty liability attributable to such manufacturing activity. On the basis of such observations, show cause proceedings were initiated against the appellant, which culminated in the adjudication order dated 16.04.2010, wherein the learned Additional Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Belgaum had confirmed Central Excise duty demand of Rs. 21,45,078/- along with interest and also imposed penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the appellant. Feeling aggrieved with the said adjudicatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, 2009 (240) ELT 403 (Tri. Delhi), this Tribunal in the relied upon case (supra) has set aside the Order-in-Appeal and allowed the appeal filed by M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited holding that the process of blending of small quantity of MFA with MS and HSD does not amount to manufacture and thus, would not attract payment of Central Excise duty. The relevant paragraphs in the said order are extracted herein below. "5. We have perused the above decision, wherein the Tribunal has observed as follows: 3. Learned Advocate placed reliance on decision of the Tribunal in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and others v. CCE, Delhi and Rohtak [2009 (234) E.L.T. 648 (T) = 2009 (16....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d MS/HSD, with different characteristics and usages. Their characteristics remain the same, as they both have to conform to the ISI specification for unblended MS/HSD and their usage also remain the same. Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in the case of CCE v. Sudarshan Chemical Industries (Supra) and this Tribunal in its Judgments in case of Lakme Lever Ltd. v. CCE (Supra) and CCE v. Mysore Ammonia Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) has held, that a process or treatment to enhance the marketability of a product or improve the value addition does not amount to manufacture. In this case, the blending only improves the quality of the MS/HSD resulting in better value addition, without charging the basic characteristics and usages of the products." ....