GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 820 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (9) TMI 820 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2015 (326) E.L.T. 607 (Tri. - Del.) - D100% EOU - DTA clearance - Denial of benefit of Notification No. 8/97-CE dated 01/3/97 - Non maintenance of separate accounts - Held that:- The admitted fact is that the appellant did not maintain separate accounts of raw material during the period. The appellant were admittedly clearing a very small portion of the production (less than 1%) in DTA. It is seen that the tripods cleared in DTA have suffered only concession .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dering the facts now pleaded by the appellant it is clear that no differential duty can be demanded as there was no import of raw materials prior to the date of manufacture of goods later cleared to DTA. These were earlier rejected/returned tripods.

Though the appellant pleaded these grounds before the lower authority no findings were given except the observation that the same is not subject matter of the instance case as the appellant themselves paid the duty without insistence by th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

U engaged in the manufacture of tripods using aluminium ingots as raw material procured indigenously and by import. The Central Excise officers on verification of records found that the appellant had cleared tripod/aluminium dust and slag in DTA availing Notification No. 8/97-CE dated 01/3/97 which is available if the said goods are manufactured wholly out of indigenous raw material. Since the appellant did not maintain separate records of imported/ indigenous source of raw materials proceedings .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssioner (Appeals). They pleaded that the rejected tripods valued at ₹ 87,350/- were manufactured prior to first import of aluminium ingots on 13/01/2004. As there were no imports prior to that date all raw materials used were indigenous only in respect of rejected tripods manufactured prior to 23/05/2003. These were returned rejected stock from the foreign buyer. Hence it is apparent the tripods cleared in DTA were eligible for Notification No. 8/97-CE. 3. Regarding aluminium dust and slag .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

te account of usage of raw material (indigenous or imported) they are not eligible for the concession claimed as per Notification No. 8/97-CE. 5. Heard both the sides. Considered their submissions. 6. The admitted fact is that the appellant did not maintain separate accounts of raw material during the period. The appellant were admittedly clearing a very small portion of the production (less than 1%) in DTA. It is seen that the tripods cleared in DTA have suffered only concessional rate of duty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version