Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Pahal Foods Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs, Central ... on 29 November, 2013
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Final Order No. 27027/2013 Application(s) Involved: E/Stay/27198/2013 in E/26869/2013-SM Appeal(s) Involved: E/26869/2013-SM [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 20/2013 dated 12/03/2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Hyderabad-IV] Pahal Foods Pvt. Ltd. 7-4-112/2, Sy.No.74/P & 75P, Madhuban Colony Road, Kattedan, Hyderabad - 500 077 Andhra Pradesh Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Hyderabad-IV Posnett Bhawan, Tilak Road, Ramkoti, Hyderabad - 500 001, Andhra Pradesh Respondent(s)
Appearance:
None B-201, Highrise Apartments, 1-3-1024/8, Lower Tankbund Road, Behind Hotel Marriott Courtyard Hyderabad - 500 080 For the Appellant Mr. Ganesh Haavanur, Additional Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER Date of Hearing: 29/11/2013 Date of Decision: 29/11/2013 No one is present on behalf of the appellant. However written submissions have been received.
2. The issue involved in the appeal is whether the appellant is liable to pay excise duty on sugar syrup which arises during the course of manufacture of biscuits which are exempted from payment of duty. The appellants have submitted that in a similar case, the Tribunal has remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority since there was no specific finding about the marketability of sugar syrup. They relied upon a decision in the case of Homemade Bakers (India) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Rohtak [2012 (280) E.L.T. 429 (Tri.-Del.)]. In that case the Tribunal has observed that there was no test report of the sugar syrup manufactured by the appellant and there was no clear finding about marketability. There was also no indication as to the shelf life of sugar syrup. Learned AR submits that even though Commissioner has recorded detailed observations on the issue, the matter may still have to be remanded in view of the opinion of Chief Chemist that when sugar concentration is more than 65% it may have shelf life. In this case also he says that there is no indication as to the percentage of sugar in the sugar syrup manufactured by the appellant. The appellants are also seeking remand of the matter at this stage itself to enable the original authority to record a clear finding about the marketability of the product.
3. In view of the discussions above, it is quite clear that the matter is required to be remanded since there is no finding on marketability which is very important for determining dutiability of the sugar syrup. Accordingly the requirement of pre-deposit is waived, the impugned order is set aside and matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority who may get the sugar syrup tested and thereafter proceed to determine the marketability of the sugar syrup manufactured by the appellants after giving a reasonable opportunity to the appellants to present their case. It is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the issue involved and original authority may proceed to pass the order in accordance with law.
(Order dictated and pronounced in open court) (B.S.V. MURTHY) TECHNICAL MEMBER iss