M/S. Maharashtra Glass & Agro Ltd. vs Cce, Pune on 28 May, 2001
4. Ld. SDR distinguished both the judgments and pointed out that the machine should produce a commodity, which is marketable as held in the citations relied by the Counsel. He submitted that even in terms of their own submissions in the appeal memo, the machine only does the function to clip/seal the edges of the paper and the same is not marketable and hence it is not a commodity. He relied on the judgment rendered in the case of Maharashtra Glass and Agro Ltd. v. CCE, 2001 (132) ELT 283 wherein washing and drying machine (horizontal) imported for washing and drying glass and glass articles was held to be not a machine meant for production of commodities and hence the benefit was not extended.