Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (1) TMI 1012

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rities without affording any opportunity to the assessee. In the present case before us the concession was given after the adjudicating authority decided the case after following the principles of natural justice and the case was argued at length before this bench before remand order dt 1/5/2000 was passed. Therefore, the ratio laid by Hon’ble Apex Court is not applicable to the present factual matrix when appellant is a Public Sector undertaking and principles of natural justice have not been violated earlier. In view of the above observations appeal filed by the appellant on the grounds of limitations again, when not even agitated before the Adjudicating authority in remand proceedings, can not be entertained & is required to be dismissed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rstwhile Central Excise Rules- 1944 read with Rule- 173 Q of the said Rules. 2. Sh. Rajiv Agarwal (CA) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that the period of dispute is from 1/3/1986 to 27/7/1988. That appellant is manufacturing Coal Tubs in the mines. That these Coal Tubs before and after the above disputed period were exempted and appellant was under the bonafide belief that during the intermediate disputed period also their product must have been exempted. Learned CA appearing on behalf of the appellant fairly conceded that benefit of exemption Notf No. 182/87-CE dt 10/7/87 was not admissible to them but extended period can not be invoked in their case as per the following case laws. (i) Ultra Flax (P) Ltd Vs. CCE Faridaba .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... links, tub blocks etc. and assembling these parts in their workshop/colliery. He submits that such process of fitting and assembling of component of coal tubs cannot amount to a manufacturing activity within the meaning and scope of Section 2(f) of Central Excises Act, 1944 inasmuch as no new product is brought into existence by such process of fitting. This contention of the appellants has not been accepted by the Commissioner on the ground that the process undertaken by the appellants results in emergence of new product which is classifiable under sub-heading 8606.00 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Shri Chakraborty has relied upon the Tribunal s decision in the case of Dalmia Industries Ltd. - 1999 (112) E.L.T. 305 (Tribunal) wherein .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lso been argued before us that the demand confirmed by the Commissioner also includes the demands in respect of the repaired coal tubs. Dr. Chakraborty has argued that the coal tubs so manufactured by them need continuous repairing. Such a repairing activity cannot be held to be a process of manufacture and the demand cannot be raised on the same account. We agree with the above submission of the ld. Advocate. No duty is leviable on the repaired items. 5. Dr. Chakraborty has raised an alternative plea that the benefit of exemption Notification No. 182/87 was available to them in respect of the coal tubs, so produced in the workshop and used in the mines w.e.f. 10-7-1987, the date of issuance of the said notification. For this propositi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... so not raised before the adjudicating authority by the appellant and no findings on that aspect could be given by the Adjudicating authority. It is thus observed from the case records that appellant did not press on the time bar aspect in the earlier proceedings before and also did not raise the same before the adjudicating authority. Appellant is a public sector undertaking and it is not ethical on their part now to agitate the time bar aspect afresh after conceding the same before us in the earlier proceedings. Reliance by the appellant on the Apex Court s case law in the case of Union of India Vs Madhumilan syntax Ltd (Supra) is misplaced because the order passed by the Apex court was as a result of a writ petition against an order of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates