Aggrieved, the appellant filed appeals before the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal companyfirmed the demand of duty and modified the penalty and interest imposed by the Commissioner.
These appeals are filed under Section 35L b of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for short the Act , against the order dated 30th January, 2003 of the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal for short the Tribunal , West Zonal Bench at Mumbai.
The appellant manufactured plastic tubes in its factory and supplied the same to M s Colgate Palmolive I Ltd. for short Colgate .
The reason given by the Tribunal in the impugned order is that this Court in Union of India versus J.G. Glass Industries Ltd.,1998 97 L.T. 5 S.C. , had held that printing carried out on plain glass bottles in a different factory would number amount to manufacture under Section 2 f of the Act, but, if manufacture of bottles and printing thereon are carried out within the same factory, then the ultimate product, which happens to be excisable item at the factory gate, is the printed bottle.
After companysidering the reply to the show cause numberices, the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai III, passed an order dated 17th July, 1997, companyfirming the demand of excise duty amounting to Rs.54,30,713/ and imposing a penalty of 2/ Rs.41,00,000/ under Rule 173 Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and also directing the appellant to pay interest at the rate of 20 under Section 11 AB of the Act, on delayed payment of duty for the relevant periods, saying that the plastic caps, which were put on the plastic tubes, were number included in the assessable value of the plastic tubes manufactured and cleared from the factory of the appellant.
