TATA TEA LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE stay application, after due hearing both sides, was allowed granting waiver of pre -deposit of duty and cess confirmed in the impugned order. As the issue lies in a short compass, the appeal itself is taken up for final disposal as per law.

(2.) IN the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has noted the fact that the appellants were receiving rejected Tea under the provisions of Rule 173H of Central Excise Rules, 1944. However without accompanied with any duty paying documents, he has rejected the submissions of the appellants that the "Rejected Tea" does not undergo the process of grinding, pulverising, powdering and that there is no other processing amounting to a process of manufacture undertaken by them and that no new product emerged for excisability. He has, however, gone by the records wherein it has supposed to have been noted that the item undergoes processes like grinding, pulverising and powdering then it is mixed with the green leaves. Therefore, he held that there was a process of manufacture and hence confirmed the duty.

(3.) APPEARING for the Revenue, Id. DR reiterated the departmental view and distinguished the order -in -appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Cochin relied by the Id. Counsel and submitted that there was no dispute therein pertaining to payment of duty on the "Re -processed Tea". Ld. Counsel in countering, submits that they had paid duty voluntarily and taken Modvat credit.