COMMR.OF CUSTOMS,MUMBAI-I vs. M/S SEIKO BRUSHWARE INDIA

The appeal is disposed of

Section 68 of the Customs Act, 1962 (no. 52 of 1962), as the case may, makes a specified C.A. No. 216/2007 1 Page 2

M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI

The appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Processing & Hence A Substantial Increase In The Value Of These Inputs Has Escaped Payment Of Duty On Account Of Value Addition In Such Inputs After Processing. More Specifically, What Was Alleged Was That Various Spare Parts Relatable To Motor Vehicles That Were Manufactured By The Appellant & Were Procured By It In The Form Of Bumpers, Grills, Etc., On Which The Process Of Electro Deposition Coating, Namely, Edc Took Place (Which Was In The Nature Of Anti-Rust So That The Shelf Life Of The Said Bumpers, Grills, Etc., Would Be Generally Increased) Have Escaped Duty On

2) The inputs may be removed, after intimating the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise concerned, in writing, for home consumption or for export under bond. (3) All removals of inputs for home consumption shall be made - (a) on payment of duty equal to the amount of Page 3 JUDGMENT C.A. NO. 8190 OF 2003 3 credit availed in respect

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE HYDERABAD vs. M/S SARVOTHAM CARE LIMITED

Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In appeal preferred by the respondent, the aforesaid demand was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order in original dated 13.02.2002, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal of the respondent. Next level appeal filed by the respondent before the CESTAT, Bangalore, however, yielded results favourable to the respondent, as this