Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Iceberg Goods Ltd., Shri Dheeraj Goel, Director, Shri R.S. Gupta, General Manager Versus CCE, Rohtak

2015 (9) TMI 875 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Denial of SSI Exemption - Exemption not taken for some unit, therefore exemption denied for other units as well - Held that:- Demand was confirmed only on the ground that they have been paying duty in two of their units at Jaipur and Vasai and accordingly they cannot avail SSI exemption for their Rohad unit. It appears that the Department proceeded on the basis of the condition that clearance of all the factories of the same manufacturer should be considered for exemption and as such option of d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ecember 2003 to January 2004 is shown as ₹ 22,16,180/-. We find that if a combined reading of all the conditions of para 2 of the Notification No. 8/2003-CE is to be taken then aggregate value of all excisable goods cleared from one or more factories by the same manufacturer is to be considered. - option of payment of duty is to be exercised for all factories of the same manufacturer. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Excise Appeal Nos. 2329-2331 of 2006 - Final Order No. 52300-52302/2015 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ared under their own brand name. During the year 2004-2005 also (April to August 2004) they have availed SSI exemption on their own goods. In respect of Kingfisher brand, they have availed rural area exemption. They have two more factories at Jaipur and Vasai. They were issued with a show cause notice on 07/7/2005 on the ground that since they have not availed SSI exemption for their units in Vasai and Jaipur they are not eligible for SSI exemption in their further Rohad unit. The case was adjud .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Vasai were paying duty and availing Cenvat credit. The present order relating to Rohad unit is not sustainable in law as they have operated as per the condition No. (i) of para 2 of the Notification No. 8/2003-CE. There is no condition about the status of other units of the manufacturer. He also contended that the Jaipur unit was set up in October 2003 and Vasai unit in December 2003 whereas the Rohad unit (present appellant unit) was set up in July 2002 they have exercised the option for availi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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