Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2021 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (11) TMI 461 - AT - Central ExciseProcess amounting to manufacture or not - Aluminium dross and skimming arising out of the manufacture of aluminium motor vehicle parts - Applicability of explanation to section 2(d) of Central Excise Act, 1944 - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute prior to 2008 amendment. In the various judgments even after considering the amendment section 2(d) to Central Excise Act, 1944 it was held that no duty liability arise on the aluminium dross skimming generated unavoidably during the manufacture of aluminium products. Reliance placed in the Supreme Court judgement UNION OF INDIA VERSUS HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LIMITED [2019 (3) TMI 1933 - SC ORDER], where it was held that manufacture do not take place. The generation of aluminium dross and skimming in the manufacture of aluminium castings/parts of motor vehicles does not amount to manufacture. Accordingly, it is not liable to duty. Time limitation - HELD THAT:- Since the issue itself is not sustainable on merits, Revenue’s appeal, which is on time-bar will also not sustain. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee.
|