Page 54 - ELT_1_1st April 2020_Vol 372_Part

A28 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

“Delay condoned.
Issue notice.
List along with Civil Appeal Diary Nos. 24992/2019, 34321/2019 and
other connected cases, if any.”
The Appellate Tribunal in its impugned order had held that the fatty ac-
id, wax and gum arising during manufacture of refined vegetable oil, are to be
treated as waste and eligible to exemption under Notification No. 89/1995-C.E.
REPRESENTED BY : Mr. A.N.S. Nadkarni, ASG, Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,
AOR, Mr. S.A. Haseeb, Mr. S.S. Rebello, Ms. Arzu
Paul, Mr. Neeleshwar Pavani and Ms. Riya Soni, Ad-
vocates, for the Appellant.
Ms. Charanya Lakshmikumaran, AOR, Mr. Aaditya
Bhattacharya, Ms. Apeksha Mehta and Ms. Monica
Kasturi, Advocates, for the Respondent.

(1) Tobacco — Product marketed as chewing tobacco by
declaring description on pouches as Chewing Tobac-
co Premium, whether classifiable under Central Ex-
cise Tariff Item 2403 99 10?

(2) Sample test report given in absence of test memos
whether reliable?
(3) Sample testing – Denial of request for re-testing of
samples when initial test report inconclusive, wheth-
er amounts to violation of principles of natural jus-
tice?
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.M.
Khanwilkar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Maheshwari on 14-2-2020 issued
notice in Civil Appeal Diary No. 44912 of 2019 filed by Commissioner of CGST,
Excise and Customs, Bhopal against the CESTAT Final Order Nos. 53614-
53620/2018, dated 14-11-2018 as reported in 2020 (372) E.L.T. 145 (Tri.-Del.)
(Kaipan Pan Masala Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner). While issuing the notice, the Su-
preme Court passed the following order :
“Issue notice on the application for condonation of delay as well as on
the Civil Appeal.
Tag with Civil Appeal Nos. 10159-10161 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No.
5146 of 2015.”
The Appellate Tribunal in its impugned order had held that the product
was being marketed as chewing tobacco by declaring description on pouches as
Chewing Tobacco Premium, the same was classifiable under Tariff Item 2403 99
10 of Central Excise Tariff in view of the decision in the case of Flakes-N-Flavourz
v. Commissioner [2015 (327) E.L.T. 435 (Tri. - Del.)] and not under Tariff Item 2403
99 30 as Zarda Scented Tobacco.
The Tribunal had further held that the test report of samples given in ab-
sence of test memos which were not prepared at the time of drawl of such sam-
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st April 2020  102