SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

K.S.VENKATARAMANI, S.L.PEERAN
T. T. K. Pharma Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.S. Sundarajan,J.M.S. Sundaram

ORDER

S.L. Peeran, Member (J)

1. The appellants are aggrieved with the Order-in-Appeal passed by Collector (Appeals), Bangalore upholding their claim for classification of the product Try Snack Foods called Fryums' under Chapter Heading 21 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 but has denied the benefit of the Notification No. 12/90-C.E., dated 20-3-1990. The learned Collector (Appeals) has negatived the contention of the appellants that the product in question is 'Namkeens'. He has held that "the term Namkeen as used in the notification would denote only such of these items which are ready to eat. The examples cited, that is, Bhujiya and Chabena only clarify the situation that both these products are in a ready to eat condition and do not require any further processing except opening and eating. Fryums or namkeens, manufactured by the appellants would not be covered by the notification. The appellants' product requires to be fried before it can be eaten. They are, therefore, not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 12/90. The appeal is accordingly disposed of."

2. The appellant has given the various steps in the process of manufacture of the Fryums as follows :-

"Step 1 : Raw mat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top