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 →

Godfrey Philips India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-IV

2016 (2) TMI 253 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Duty demand on waste/scrap of packing materials cleared from the factory - Held that:- The dispute in the present appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of International Tobacco Co. Ltd. vs. CCE, Ghaziabad [2003 (10) TMI 171 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] wherein held that there is force in the submissions of the learned Advocate that no process of manufacture has been taken by them so as to attract the Central Excise duty on such waste of the paper arising during the cours .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l. - Decided in favour of assessee - Appeal No. E/210/07-Mum - A/85238/16/EB - Dated:- 22-12-2015 - MR. P.S. PRUTHI, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) AND MR. S.S. GARG, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri H.M. Dixit, Assistant Commissioner (AR) ORDER PER: S.S. GARG The present appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No. CPA/60/M-IV/06 dated 2.11.2006 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I, upholding the order-in-original. 2. Br .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

manufacture of cigarettes, some inputs get deformed, torn, wet and soiled and become unusable and are rejected. 2.1 The appellant was issued show cause notice dated 5.5.2005 demanding an amount of ₹ 2,07,446/- as duty on waste/scrap of packing materials cleared from the factory during the period April 2004 to March 2005. The appellant submitted the reply alleging that they are not manufacturing waste/scrap and they are not liable to pay duty and that this issue has already been covered in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the dispute in the present appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of International Tobacco Co. Ltd. vs. CCE, Ghaziabad reported in 2004 (165) ELT 314 (Tri.-Del.). He further submitted that he cited the above decision before both the authorities below but both the authorities have not given any findings whatsoever as to why the said decision is not applicable to the facts of 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

arpur Industries Ltd. reported in 2014 (300) ELT 181 (P&H); (v) VVF Ltd. vs. CCE reported in 2009 (248) ELT 593 (Tri.-Ahmd.). 3.1 The learned counsel also submitted that the Tribunal in the judgments cited above has categorically held that no process of manufacture has taken place so as to attract excise duty on wastes of paper. 4. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). 5. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the .....

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