Source: http://www.swamilawyer.com/2017/02/commissioner-central-excise-bangalore.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 16:32:23+00:00

Document:
pertains only to food flavours.
provided the manufacturing logo, quality control, product research, etc.
manufacturers for manufacture of IMFL.
rates negotiated and determined by the respondent.
more than EDP, the difference accrued to the respondent.
flavours do not matter in the IMFL business.
proportion was maintained as a trade secret of the respondent.
asserted by the respondent, did not vary and remain identical.
their selling price of the said brands and their EDP.
parties for effective hearing. The issue of penalty was also kept open.
27.02.2004. It placed reliance on the decision in Pepsi Foods Ltd. v.
accordingly confirmed the demand under proviso to Section 11A of the Act.
Section 11AB was also levied. A penalty of Rs.
the Central Excise Rules, 2002.
Limited & Anr. Etc. v. UOI & Anr, Etc, and Tata Chemicals Limited v.
to obtain paint in different shade would not amount to manufacture.
circumstances, the notices were clearly barred by time.
Laminates Pvt. Ltd. & Ors v. CCE, Ahmedabad, Union Of India & Others v.
Sonic Electrochem (P) Ltd. and another and CCE, Chandigarh-II v.
McDowell but their own brands which establish marketability of the product.
be treated as additional consideration.
nexus between royalty and the food flavour.
independent buyers and the prices at which food flavours are sold to CBUs.
the appellants. Such independent manufacturers would not pay any royalty.
Chennai v. Titanium Equipment & Anode Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
code numbers assigned by the assessee, hence a new identity is established.
Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (supra) and Servo Med Industries Pvt. Ltd. v.
assessable value is computable for this type of customers.
Valuation Rules as has been held in Pepsi Foods Ltd.
absolutely justified in setting aside the same.
distinct in identity from the commodity involved in its manufacture.
of processing and perhaps a different kind of processing at each stage.
With each process suffered, the original commodity experiences a change.
commercial article held come into existence include Anwarkhan Mahboob Co.
as raw materials in industry”.
original form, consists of various isomers and is an odoriferous substance.
It has been dissolved in diethyl phthalate, a non-odoriferous substance.
industry, it would be classifiable under Heading 33.02.
reference may be made to the authority in Income Tax Officer, Udaipur v.
original block does not remain the marble block, it becomes a slab or tile.
production in terms of Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
connect was established to club the two considerations.
full factual matrix being lucent and absolutely clear.
a tile for the purpose of coming within the ambit and sweep of Entry 8.
involved and undertaken. Different flavours may have different processes.
held that certain show cause notices are barred by limitation. Mr.
scrutinized the dates appropriately, but has returned a cryptic finding.
Court can appropriately appreciate the controversy.
tribunal for fresh determination. There shall be no order as to costs.

References: v.

 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.