New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (3) TMI 1152 - CESTAT BANGALORE

2015 (3) TMI 1152 - CESTAT BANGALORE - 2015 (328) E.L.T. 640 (Tri. - Bang.) - Cancellation of registration certificate - Interest demand - place of removal - duty ought to have been paid on 17-12-2007 i.e. the date on which Central Excise registration was granted to Sri Chamundeshwari Sugars Ltd.- whether the goods can be deemed to have been removed on the date on which the factory premises were handed to Sri Chamundeshwari Sugars Ltd? - Held that:- It cannot be said that there was deemed cancel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt was cancelled which invariably is done before a registration certificate is issued to the next person. In such cases invariably, the person who is surrendering the license or whose license is cancelled is required to pay all the arrears or pay duty on the goods. If they were to do so, the duty would have been collected on the date itself. Similarly if the appellants were to be aware of these provisions, they could have taken permission to store the goods elsewhere without payment of duty from .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rity. However, have not been able to find legal provision which provides for enforcement of the demand made by the Revenue. - Decided in favour of assessee - E/488/2009-SM - Final Order No. 20775/2015 - Dated:- 6-3-2015 - Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T) Shri Anil Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Nigam, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER The factory and the machinery etc. were leased to M/s. Chamundeswari Sugars Ltd. on 17-12-2007. According to the lease agreement, the appellant was allowe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tration was granted to Sri Chamundeshwari Sugars Ltd., and also to impose penalty. The appellant is in appeal against this confirmation of demand for interest. 2. The learned counsel on behalf of the appellant submitted that Appellant had made payment of duty whenever they had cleared sugar from the store room and therefore the duty was paid in accordance with law. The goods manufactured by the applicant were very much available in the factory of manufacture itself as on 17-12-2008 till 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

uing authority. In this case, the appellant did not seek cancellation of registration nor registration certificate was revoked by the proper authority. Similarly, the goods cannot be deemed to have been removed from the place of removal to attract levy of Central Excise duty. The circular cited above also specifically provides that registration once granted is permanent, unless it is cancelled or revoked. The appellant did not apply for cancellation of registration since the appellant was carryi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

umed that the registration certificate issued to the appellant was not cancelled by mistake. According to Circular No. 662/53/2002-CX., dated 17-9-2002, an officer granting registration has to carry out post facto verification within five days and cancel the registration if major discrepancies are found. This was not done in this case. No loss of revenue has occurred to the department and therefore interest cannot be demanded. According to the agreement with Shri Chamundeshwari Sugars Ltd., 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

rchaser in respect of the premises in question. This would show that in respect of the same premises, there can be two registration certificates. 3. The learned AR would submit that : There cannot be two registration certificates in respect of the same premises. Therefore if the appellant did not apply for cancellation of registration, it is deemed to have been deregistered. Once the same premises is issued with a registration certificate for another manufacturer, the day the premises or 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

ble in the books is on the subsequent registration certificate holder. The provisions relating to registration are very clear and there cannot be two registrations in respect of the same premises. The decision cited by the learned counsel is not of any help since in that case two manufacturers did not operate from the same premises. The owner of the earlier premises had ceased to function and was no longer in the business of manufacture and therefore there was only one person operating from 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

gate as the place of removal came to an end. Now the provisions of Section 4(3)(c) of Central Excise Act, 1944 (Act) provide that place of removal can be a factory, warehouse, or any other premises wherein excisable goods have been permitted to be deposited without payment of duty, a depot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or premises from where the excisable goods are to be sold after their clearance from the factory. The transaction value is required to be determined at the p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

parately shown. The assessee is required to maintain a daily stock register, which requirement continues even now and the daily stock register shows the stock in the warehouse. Warehouse of a factory is the place wherein statutorily, a manufacturer can keep the goods manufactured by him without payment of duty. This is because even though the taxable event for levy of Central Excise duty is manufacture, collection takes place only at the time of removal. That being the position, during the time .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n this case, the only question that has to be determined is whether the goods can be deemed to have been removed on the date on which the factory premises were handed to Sri Chamundeshwari Sugars Ltd. There is no dispute about the fact that a copy of the agreement was provided to the department by Sri Chamundeshwari Sugars Ltd., for obtaining the registration certificate since this is one of the essential documents about the control over the premises which is verified by the officers while grant .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n the warehouse. Such returns were received by the officers concerned. Obviously the natural conclusion that would arise is that the officers were aware that appellant was an assessee who was clearing the goods without manufacturing the same and both the appellant and Sri Chamundeshwari Sugars were operating from the same warehouse as far the clearances are concerned. I have already observed that levy of duty or demand of duty arises only when the goods are removed from the place of removal. 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

ld have divided the warehouse into two portions and one portion would have been used by the appellant for keeping their goods in stock and the other portion would have been used by Sri Chamundeshwari Sugars Ltd. to keep their stock. There is no contrary finding that such is not the case, or there was any defect or mix-up. It was also submitted that the sugar manufactured by the appellant could not have been cleared in the name of Sri Chamundeshwari Sugars Ltd. and therefore the appellants adopte .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ne person and issue of registration certificate to the other, existing stock of inputs and the credit admissible thereon and the existing credit in the books and for transfer thereof there are clear provisions. However, there are no specific provisions in the law as regards the finished products lying in the factory. Even if the finished products are also sold along with the factory, the person buying the factory naturally will have to pay the duty on the goods purchased and make arrangements to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

arned counsel that in the absence of a proper cancellation of the registration certificate issued to the appellant, it should be said that they continue to have the right to manufacture goods in the same factory and to clear the goods from the same warehouse. There is only one place in the law where operation of a factory by two persons or more than one person has been considered, i.e. in respect of SSI units. The notification clearly provides that if one or more persons make clearances from 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

are issued, the govt is conscious of the provisions of law) shows that clearances can be there by two persons from the same factory. If there was no provision for clearances by two manufacturers from one factory, this clause was not at all required. 9. With the segregation of place of removal and non-existence of concept of normal price at the factory gate, and provisions relating to place of removal providing that it can be a depot which may be of a consignment agent would show that there .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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