Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 1144 - AT - Central ExciseManufacture - process of mixing base paint with the colourants to obtain the pain of a desired shade known as “Tinting” - Held that:- The appellant at the depot are carrying out the activities of tinting, i.e., mixing of base paints with colourants. Therefore, the said product is packed and sold to the dealer. The said activity is amount the manufacture by the fiction of the law as per section 2(f) (iii) of Central Excise Act, 1944. All the activities such as packing, repacking, labelling, relabeling, declaration or alteration of retail sale price or adoption of any other treatment of product to render the product marketable will independently amount to manufacture - In the facts of the present case, the appellant have carried out activities of mixing base paint with colourants. Thereafter it is packed in unit containers and sold in the market. Even if it is accepted that the activities is that which render the product marketable to the consumers is manufactured only when the goods are sold to the ultimate consumer, all other activities such as packing or repacking or labelling or relabeling individually amount to manufacture. Therefore, under any circumstances, the activity carried out by the appellant is indeed manufacture. Time Limitation - Held that:- the provision of section 2 (f) (iii) is very clear and there is no ambiguity therein - It cannot be said that the issue is of interpretational nature - Therefore the demand for the entire period along with the penalty is sustainable. Penalty on Sh. P.S. Choudhary, who is the Regional Manager, marketing - Held that:- It cannot be said that Sh. P.S. Choudhary, as individual has any role in evasion of duty. Accordingly, considering the overall facts and circumstance, we set aside penalty imposed on Sh. P.S. Choudhary. Appeal allowed in part.
|