EID PARRY (INDIA) LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant challenges the order made by the Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the order in original by which the provisional assessment for the period from 1.3.2002 to 22.2.2003 was finalised and the assessee was directed to pay the differential duty amount which according to the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants, comes to Rs. 1,00,35,929/ -. The dispute centres around the question whether "sanitaryware" notified by the Central Government under Section 4 -A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 would make sanitary items covered under grass/haystack, etc. liable to payment of excise duty under Section 4 -A on the basis that such pre -packed items were intended to reach the consumer in that condition.

(2.) THERE is no dispute over the fact that the sanitarware items manufactured by the applicant were wrapped in grass/haystack. According to the applicant, they were so wrapped to ensure that there was no breakage during transport, while according to the Revenue, they were required to be treated as items intended to be sold in pre -packed condition.

(3.) THE Commissioner (Appeals) found that the goods manufactured by the applicants attracted the provisions of the standards of Weights and Measures (Packed Commodities) Rules, 1977. The authorities below also relied upon the information given on 17.6.2003 by the Director of Legal Metrology, New Delhi to the effect that these items wrapped in grass/haystack, were covered by the packed commodities Rules. The appellate Commissioner observed that the competence of the said Director for issuing such certificate was not challenged and that he did not find any reason to apply other tests for coverage of the products under the Rules.