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 →

Kaiser Spools Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax Bangalore-III

2015 (10) TMI 1188 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Exemption of duty - Notification No. 10/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 - Imposition of penalty - Held that:- Appellant's product was exempted prior to 01.03.2006. They were maintaining proper records and were filing "NIL" returns with their jurisdictional central excise officers. Even after the withdrawal of the exemption notification, they continued to file "NIL" returns with the same jurisdictional authorities even though it is on record that the office of the jurisdiction was changed from S.C. Road .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

llant was unaware of the fact of excisability of the said product. Though, not knowing the law cannot be taken as an excuse but if overall facts are viewed i.e, the appellant's maintaining proper records, filing of proper returns, acceptance of such returns by the concerned officer, the statement of the Managing Director; the same leads to an inevitable conclusion that non-payment of duty was not as a result of any malafide intention but was a pure mistake on the part of the officer. If the depa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

justified - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/421/2011-SM - Final Order No. 21200/2015 - Dated:- 28-5-2015 - Archana Wadhwa , Member (J), J. For the Appellant : Ms Vijaya Prakash, Adv For the Respondent : Mr IlanGovan, AR ORDER Per Archana Wadhwa Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of wooden spools falling under Chapter 44 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. The said goods were unconditionally exempted from payment of duty in terms of Notification No. 10/2003-CE dated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ional range office in S.C. Road, Ganesh Complex. However, it is seen that subsequently their jurisdiction was shifted to Vijayanagar range office but the appellant continued to file returns at S.C. Road Branch. 3. During the course of visit of audit in the appellant's factory on 25.09.2007, the said anomaly of clearing the goods without payment of duty was brought to the notice of the appellant, who accepted that it was a mistake on their part to clear the goods without payment of duty inasm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd imposing penalty. The said order was upheld by Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal. 5. It is the contention of the appellant that clearance of goods without payment of duty was an inadvertent mistake on their part inasmuch as they were not aware of the withdrawal of the exemption Notification and the subsequent imposition of duty. As soon as the said mistake was brought to their notice, they deposited the duty along with interest. As such, in the absence of any malafide on their .....

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