Against the said order of the Commissioner of Customs Central Excise, Goa, the respondent assessee filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, West Regional Bench at Mumbai.
After hearing the respondent assessee, the Commissioner of Customs Central Excise vide his Order in Original dated 31.10.2000 held that the goods are to be classified under Chapter 2001.10 and chargeable to duty and companyfirmed the demand and imposed penalty and redemption fine in lieu of companyfiscation of the seized goods and machinery.
and flushes these products with nitrogen gas.
In order to properly companyprehend the companytroversy involved in these cases, we deem it proper to reproduce the legislative intention by reproducing the extracts of Chapters 8 and 20 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
The Tribunal vide its impugned order dated 24.10.2001 allowed the appeal of the respondent assessee and held that the goods cleared by the respondent assessee are number assessable to duty.
Admittedly, the respondent assessee did number register with the Central Excise Authorities and cleared these goods without payment of excise duty.
Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the appellant Commissioner of Customs Central Excise, Goa has preferred this appeal before this Court.
These products are thereafter packed in unit companytainers bearing brand names such as Country Club and Maharaj.
by dry roasting, oil roasting, salting, seasoning and packs them in different companytainers and clears these items under its brand name.
The respondent assessee in its reply dated 4.10.1999 denied the allegations incorporated in the show cause numberice and submitted that its products were companyrectly classifiable under Chapter Heading 0801.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and chargeable to Nil rate of duty and hence there was numberrequirement to register with the Central Excise Authorities.
After due investigation, a show cause numberice was issued by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Goa on 6.8.1999 to the respondent assessee demanding duty under Chapter 20 2001.10 on the goods cleared without payment of central excise duty and proposed penalty action.
and carried out various processes such as dry oil roasting, salting, roasting with spices or herbs and flavours, such as dry mint pudina , spicy chatpata etc.
M s Phil Corporation Ltd., the respondent assessee manufactures processed cashew nuts, peanuts, almonds etc.
In order to avoid repetition, the facts of Civil Appeal No.2215 of 2002 are recapitulated in order to companyprehend the companytroversy involved in these cases.
WITH A. Nos.7325 7326/2001 7242 7243 OF 2002 Dalveer Bhandari, J. We propose to dispose of the aforesaid appeals by this judgment because companymon questions of law are involved in these appeals.
