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 →

C.C.E., Delhi Versus M/s. Vasundhara Flavours And Vice-Versa

2016 (7) TMI 888 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Demand of duty - Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 - period from 05.06.2012 to 29.06.2012 - Held that:- the duty for the period 28.06.2012 to 30.06.2012 was payable by 05.07.2012 in terms of 3rd proviso to Rule9 of the said Rules. In the circumstances, there is no delayed payment of duty and consequently no liability to pay interest as the assessee in this case paid the duty of ₹ 3,60,000/- on 29.06.2012 for the period 28.06.2012 to 30.06.2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hich penalty of ₹ 3,60,000/- and interest for the period 05.06.2012 to 29.06.2012 was confirmed on the ground that the appellant operated the machine during the period 28.06.2012 to 30.06.2012 and therefore the duty of ₹ 3,60,000/- should have been paid by 05.06.2012 but was paid on 29.06.2012. 2. Revenue is in appeal against the same Order-in-Appeal on the ground that the primary adjudicating authority had correctly confirmed the demand of ₹ 32,40,000/- (Rs.36 lakhs being duty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Machines (Capacity Determination Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 Indeed similar issue had come up in the case of Trimurti Fragrance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi-II, wherein the CESTAT vide its Final Order No.53520/2015, dated 24.11.2015 has analysed the issue and passed the following order:- Heard the ld. Counsel for the appellant/assessee and the ld. A.R. for the Respondent/Revenue. 2. The appeal is preferred against the order dated 29.4.2014 passed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Delhi II. 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

t of abatement allowed to the appellant. 4. The appellant is a manufacturer of pan masala and chewing tobacco and installed 12 pan masala packing machines. The procedure of installation, operation and remittance of excise duty on the appellant/manufacturer is governed by the Packing Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 (the Rules). Under Rule 9 of the Rules, monthly duty payable on notified goods shall be paid by the 5th day of same month and intimation in Form-2 i .....

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 outstanding amount. 5. For July 2013 the appellant admittedly paid duty on 27.7.2013 instead of by the 5th July 2013. According to the appellant it applied for abatement of excise duty under Rule 10 of the Rules for the period including 1.7.2013 to 7.7.2013 (7 days) on 16.8.2013. The abatement was granted by the order dated 20.9.2013. However the interest component of ₹ 1,64,910/- was deducted from the component of duty abatement granted thereby. 6. Ld. Counsel for the appellant would .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e differential duty amount, if any, shall be paid by the 5th day of the following month. On the substratum of this contention, ld. Counsel for the appellant urges that since reinstallation of the packing machines had occurred on 8.7.2013 the liability to remit duty under third proviso to Rule 9 was by 5th August, 2013 and thus there was no liability to interest. 7. Rule 8 obligates a manufacturer to file a declaration in Form1 serial No.5 of the Form I requires intimation of the number of single .....

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 notification of the Government to the number of operating packing machines in the factory during the month. Rule 8 enjoins that in case of addition or installation or removal or uninstallation of a packing machine in the factory during the month, the number of operating packing machine for the month shall be taken as the maximum number of packing machines installed on any day during the month. The provisions of Rules 6(4) and 6(5) are also relevant. Sub-rule (4) enacts that the number of op .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and removed from the factory premises under his physical supervision; and the proviso thereto states that where it is not feasible to remove such packing machine out of the factory premises, it shall be uninstalled and sealed by the Superintendent of Central Excise in such a manner that it cannot be operated. 8. On true, fair and interactive analysis of the Rules and in particular Rules 6 to 13 the conclusion is irresistible and compelling that where during any period, a manufacturer intimates i .....

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