CHAYAGRAPHICS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPEAL No. E621/98 is against the Order -in -Original No. 70/97 of the Commissioner who has determined and demanded a duty of Rs. 21,79,115/ - under Rule 9(2) read with proviso to Section 11(A) of Central Excise Act, 1944 and imposed a penalty of Rs. 3 lacs under Rule 173Q after coming to a conclusion that the entity being assembled in the registered premises of the appellants should be classified under 9010 of the Central Excise Tariff and not eligible for the benefit of SSI exemption Notification No. 1/93 -C.E.

(2.) APPEAL Nos. 2958 -2959/98 are filed by the same appellants against an Order -in -Appeal No. 460/98 of Commissioner (Appeals), Bangalore who vide his order determined, that the activity undertaken in the appellants premises amount to manufacture and the entity was correctly classified under 9010.00 and benefit of exemption under Notification No. 111/94, dated 3 -6 -1994 was not admissible as the same is applicable only to goods classified under 9022 and since the appellants were manufacturing specified goods with a brand of another person (foreign manufacturer) the benefit of exemption under SSI Notification No. 1/93 -C.E. was not available to them.

(3.) WE have heard these three appeals together and are deciding by this common order the same after hearing both sides and considering their submissions made, we find that :