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 →

VST Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Hyderabad-II

2015 (8) TMI 1316 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Demand and imposition of penalties - refuse arises during the course of undertaking the activity of cutting of tobacco leaves in the factory which was captively used - whether the benefit of captive consumption exemption notification can be extended to that quantity of tobacco which has gone into refuse which attracts NIL rate of duty - Held that:- an identical issue came up before the Tribunal in the appellants own case reported in [2015 (2) TMI 307 - CESTAT BANGALORE] wherein it was held that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Jagadish, A.R. for the Respondent. ORDER Per : ARCHANA WADHWA Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of cigarettes. They are also undertaking cutting of tobacco leaves in their factory which is further being used in the manufacture of cigarettes. 2. In terms of Notification No. 52/02, intermediate goods manufactured in the factory and further used in the manufacture of final product, which final product stands cleared on payment of duty are exempt from duty. There is no dispute about the said .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aptive consumption exemption notification cannot be extended to that quantity of tobacco which has gone into refuse. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated against them culminating in the present impugned order passed by the adjudicating authority confirming demand and imposing penalties. We find that an identical issue came up before the Tribunal in the appellants own case vide its Final Order No. 22358-22361/2014 dated 3/12/2014, the Tribunal observed as Under:- 9. In the above case it has be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re of Cigarette, and for the process of manufacture of Cigarette, they have to manufacture Cut Tobacco also. Therefore it can be clearly said that the appellant is a manufacturer of Cut Tobacco and Cigarette. Can anyone say that appellant is a manufacturer of tobacco refuse is the moot question to which the obvious answer in the light of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Golden Tobacco Ltd. is tobacco refuse is not a final product. The Tribunal also while rendering the decision in 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