C.C.E. Delhi - Iii Vs. M/S. Dhillon Cook Drinks and

C.C.E. Delhi - Iii vs M/S. Dhillon Cook Drinks and

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Oct 18, 2000

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/19470

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/19470
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: Oct 18, 2000
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

C.C.E. Delhi - Iii

Respondent

M/S. Dhillon Cook Drinks and

Excerpt

.....(22) rlt 37 (cegat),delhi bottling co. and others vs. cce nd and cce chandigarh - 1997 (22) rlt 697(cegat).2. the commissioner (appeals) has further relied on the cegat final order no.8/939-946/97-nb in the case of the present appellants, in which it is held that modvat credit is admissible in respect of duty paid on the glass bottles. the present appeal is filed by the revenue against the above order of commissioner (appeals). i have heard shri y.r. kilania, jdr for the appellants and shri k.k. anand, advocate for the respondents.3. the only contention raised in the revenue appeal is that the above stated decision of the cegat is being questioned by the department by way of reference application filed by the concerned commissioner before calcutta high court. as already stated, the tribunal in the present appellant's own case vide final order no.8/939-946/97-nb have held that the modvat credit is admissible in respect of the duty paid on the glass bottles. further, the fact that a reference application is filed or is in processing of filing before the high court itself cannot be the ground to not to follow the ratio of a number of settled cases on the issue. the revenue appeal therefore, has no force and the same is accordingly, rejected.

Full Judgment

1. The Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Panipat vide his order dt.

23.9.97 denied the modvat credit amounting to Rs.3,77,327/- to the respondents on the ground that this amount of modvat credit is availed by the respondents on 'glass bottles'. It is stated that under Rule 57A, the modvat credit on packing material i.e., 'glass bottles' used in packing aerated water is allowed only if the cost of bottle is included in the value of bottle of aerated water. It is contended that the inclusion of the value of the bottle calculated on a number of rotations of the value of bottle in the assessable value does not fulfill the condition of Rule 57-A. It is further stated that the bottle in respect of aerated water is returnable packing. The bottle is returned to the bottling plant after the contents are consumed. So, the value of final product being sold in market is the value of the contents of the bottle i.e. 'Aerated Water' (SIC) value of bottle is not included. He, accordingly held that the credit of Rs.3,77,327/- taken by the respondents on glass bottles is not admissible and is recoverable under Rule 57-I. He has also imposed penalty of Rs.2,000/- under Rule 173Q. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) New Delhi vide his order dt. 16.5.2000 allowed the appeal of the respondents relying on the following decision of the CEGAT.Black Diamond Beverages Ltd. vs. C.C.E Calcutta-I - 1997 (22) RLT 37 (CEGAT),Delhi Bottling Co. and others vs. CCE ND and CCE Chandigarh - 1997 (22) RLT 697(CEGAT).

2. The Commissioner (Appeals) has further relied on the CEGAT Final Order No.8/939-946/97-NB in the case of the present appellants, in which it is held that modvat credit is admissible in respect of duty paid on the glass bottles. The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the above order of Commissioner (Appeals). I have heard Shri Y.R. Kilania, JDR for the appellants and Shri K.K. Anand, Advocate for the Respondents.

3. The only contention raised in the Revenue appeal is that the above stated decision of the CEGAT is being questioned by the Department by way of Reference Application filed by the concerned Commissioner before Calcutta High Court. As already stated, the Tribunal in the present appellant's own case vide Final Order No.8/939-946/97-NB have held that the modvat credit is admissible in respect of the duty paid on the glass bottles. Further, the fact that a Reference Application is filed or is in processing of filing before the High Court itself cannot be the ground to not to follow the ratio of a number of settled cases on the issue. The Revenue appeal therefore, has no force and the same is accordingly, rejected.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties C.C.E. Delhi - Iii vs M/S. Dhillon Cook Drinks and Same Subject Service Tax