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, Central Excise Commissionerate, Panchkula Versus M/s Cure Quick Remedies P. Ltd., Karnal

2016 (6) TMI 16 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Entitlement to claim full SSI exemption in terms of Notification No. 8/2003-CE dated 1.3.2003 - goods manufactured under his own brand name even though Cenvat Credit was availed by it in respect of the duty paid on the inputs utilized in the manufacture of those goods which bear brand name of another person and are cleared on full payment of duty - Held that:- In the present scheme manufacturer has been given clear option to opt both of the two benefits i.e. (a) to avail the full SSI exemption w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

same lines as has been noticed by the Apex Court in the aforesaid pronouncement. Accordingly, there is no error in the approach of the Tribunal which may warrant interference by this Court. - Decided against the revenue - CEA No. 2 of 2011 (O&M) - Dated:- 4-5-2016 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. SHEKHER DHAWAN, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Vikrant Kackria, Advocate AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This order shall dispose of CEA Nos. 2 and 4 of 2011 as acc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion of substantial questions of law as proposed in para 4 of the appeal which are as under:- i) Whether Tribunal has erred in law by not appreciating the language of the relevant subpara (iii) of para 2 of Notification No. 8/2003- C.E., dated 01.03.2003, which debars the manufacturer from taking credit of duty paid on inputs, if manufacturer opts for availing of the benefit under Notification No. 8/2003-C.E., dated 01.03.2003? ii) Whether the Tribunal was correct in distinguishing the judgment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cleared by them on payment of duty. A show cause notice dated 11.1.2007 (Annexure A-1) was issued to the assesseerespondent after denial of SSI exemption by raising demand of duty along with interest and penalty. The adjudicating authority vide order dated 29.6.2007 (Annexure A-2) confirmed the demand of duty amounting to ₹ 15,73,174/- under Section 11A of the Act along with interest. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) whereas the revenue chal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 28.4.2010 (Annexure A-4) allowed the appeal and set aside the order, Annexure A-3. Hence, the present appeals. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. The issue that arises for consideration of this Court in these appeals is whether the respondent was entitled to claim full exemption in terms of Notification No. 8/2003-CE dated 1.3.2003 in respect of the goods manufactured by the assessee under his own brand name even though Cenvat Credit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Clauses read thus:- 3. For the purposes of determining the aggregate value of clearances for home consumption, the following clearances shall not be taken into account, namely- (a) clearances bearing the brand name or trade name of another person, which are ineligible for the grant of this exemption in terms of paragraph 4. XX XX XX 4. The exemption contained in this notification shall not apply to specified goods bearing a brand name or trade name, whether registered or not, of another person. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

person which are ineligible for the grant of exemption under the said notification in terms of Clause 4 thereof shall not be taken into account. Further, the relevant portion of Clause 4 of the aforesaid notification stipulates that the exemption contained in the notification would not apply to the specified goods bearing the brand name or trade name whether registered or not of another person. It has been noted in clause 1 of the Table contained in the said notification, which deals with the su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing brand name or the trade name of another person, manufactured by the assessee and cleared on payment of entire duty would not be entitled to claim the benefit under the said notification. Simultaneously the specified goods manufactured in the brand name of the assessee were not excluded from availing the benefit of exemption under the said notification even though in case of the former goods, the assessee seeks to avail the Cenvat credit facility in respect of the duty paid on the inputs util .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ad thus:- ....Taking into consideration the facts of the matter in Ramesh Food Products case and bearing in mind, the pre-condition for availing the benefit of the notification No. 175/86-CE dated 01.03.86, it is abundantly clear that the manufacturer thereunder was given clear option to choose between the two benefits, one under the notification and another under the Modvat Scheme and not to avail both the benefits simultaneously. That is not the case under Notification No. 8/2003-CE dated 01.0 .....

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 on payment of full duty. The notification being abundantly clear in this regard, in our considered opinion, the authorities below erred in applying the decision in Ramesh Food Products to the cases in hand and to deny the benefit of SSI Exemption to the goods to which the said exemption notification applies. The impugned orders, therefore, in this regard, cannot be sustained and the demand of duty made while denying the benefit under the said notification cannot be sustained. 10. The approach .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fications in the context of the issue that arises for determination in these appeals. In Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad v. Ramesh Food Products - 2004 (174) ELT 310 (S.C.), the assessee therein was engaged in the manufacture of biscuits under the brand name 'Ramesh' on his own account. It was also manufacturing, on job work basis, biscuits under the brand name of 'Cadbury' on behalf of M/s. Hindustan Coco Products, Bombay. It availed MODVAT benefit on the inputs used f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eously opt for goods of one heading and MODVAT facility in respect of another heading. Assessee's appeal before the CEGAT was decided in favour of the assessee, which decision of CEGAT was upset by this Court in the judgment. This Court noted that the CEGAT had relied upon another judgment of Tribunal in Faridabad Tools Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise - 1993 (63) E.L.T. 759 which was specifically overruled by a larger Bench of CEGAT in Kamani Food v. Collector of Central Excise - 19 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o apply to the specified goods bearing a brand name or trade name, whether registered or not, of any person, except under certain circumstances specifically stipulated therein. The Notifications also clarify that for the purpose of these Notifications, where the goods manufactured by a manufacturer bear brand name or trade name (whether registered or not) of any manufacturer of trade, they shall not be deemed to have been manufactured by such other manufacturer or trade. Reading of the aforesaid .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ue of the clearances for home consumption; and (b) such products bearing brand names or trade names of third parties, even if manufactured by the SSI Unit, are not eligible for any exemption and excise duty thereupon has to be paid. Once we understand the scheme of the Notifications in the aforesaid perspective, which according to us is the only manner in which it has to be understood, it becomes apparent that so far as manufacture of branded goods of third party on job work basis by the SSI Uni .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on those inputs also excise duty was paid. To put it otherwise, these branded goods manufactured by the SSI Units meant for third parties are regulated by the normal provisions of excise law and will have no bearing or relevance insofar as availing the benefit of those exemption notifications in respect of its own products manufactured by the SSI Units is concerned. 11. In all fairness to learned counsel for the appellant, it would be imperative to refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in R .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ied upon its earlier judgment in Faridabad Tools case, which was decided in the year 1993, without realising that the said judgment had been overruled by a larger Bench of the Tribunal in Kamani Foods case, decided in the year 1995. (b) In view of the above, this Court was influenced by the fact that smaller Bench of the Tribunal, while giving the decision which was impugned before it, was bound to follow the judgment of the larger Bench as per the demands of judicial propriety. (c) In Kamani Fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 85/85- Central Excises, dated the 17th March, 1985, the Central Government hereby exempts the excisable goods of the description specified in the Annexure below and falling under the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986), (hereinafter referred to as the specified goods ), and cleared for hom .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ied in the said Schedule [read with any relevant notification issued under sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the said Rules or sub-section (1) of section 5A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) and in force for the time being] as is equivalent to an amount calculated at the rate of 10% ad valorem: (ii) in any other case from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon : Provided that the aggregate value of clearances of the specified goods under sub-clause (ii) of this clause in re .....

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