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 →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur Versus Plastika Industries

2016 (3) TMI 261 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Demand of duty for clearance of waste and scrap - case of the assesse that they had cleared the waste and scrap under the provisions of Notification 214/86-CE and received back the granules which are used for manufacturing process - Held that:- Both the lower authorities have given concurrent findings as to the demand being unsustainable. Both the lower authorities have recorded a factual findings that the plastic waste and scrap generated during the manufacture is sent to manufacturer for conve .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s on which duty of excise is leviable whether in whole or in part. In the case in hand, it is undisputed that the plastic waste and scrap which gets generated during the manufacture of final products are sent to job-worker and received back as granules which are further consumed in the manufacture of final products. On the face of such factual matrix, in our view, both the lower authorities were correct in holding that no liability arise on the respondent-assessee. - Further, the benefit of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ap. Factually also, it is not in dispute that the waste and scrap which is sent to job-worker is received back as granules, nothing survives in the appeal. - Decided in favour of assessee - Appeal No. E/3208/2005 - A/85087/16/EB - Dated:- 2-12-2015 - M V Ravindran, Member (J) And C J Mathew, Member (T) For the Appellant : Shri S Hasija, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent : None ORDER Per M V Ravindran This appeal is filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. AT/417/Bel/2005 dated 29/07 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d waste and scrap, converted as semi-finished products. A show cause notice was issued to the respondent asking them to show cause as to why the duty liability be not demanded from them, as provisions of Notification 214/86 would apply only to the inputs and semi finished goods which can be sent for job-work. Respondent contested the matter before the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority, after following due process of law dropped the proceedings initiated by the show cause notice. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he findings of the first appellate authority on the following grounds. 3.1. Respondent cleared waste and scrap of plastics and did not claim any exemption from tariff rate while clearing the waste and scrap. However, while clearing the dutiable waste and scrap of plastic claimed benefit of job-work Notification No. 214/86 for converting waste into granules was claimed. 3.2. Exemption contained in Notification No. 214/86 shall be applicable only if the goods in respect of which duty liability on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

itions stipulated in Notification do not get fulfilled, hence the judgment of the larger bench in the case of Wyeth Laboratories (supra) in incorrectly applied; 3.5. That the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Narmada Plastics (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2004 (178) ELT 806 will be applicable wherein it was held waste and scrap removal of, for reprocessing and return, erstwhile Rule 57F is not applicable. 3.6. Judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Techno Cable Pvt. Ltd. vs. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

involved is regarding demand of duty on the respondent for clearance of waste and scrap during the period 1998-99 to 1999-2000 on the ground that the duty liability needs to be discharge on such clearance while it is the case of the assessee respondent that they had cleared the waste and scrap under the provisions of Notification 214/86-CE and received back the granules which are used for manufacturing process. 6. At the outset we find both the lower authorities have given concurrent findings a .....

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