Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (8) TMI 1316 - CESTAT BANGALORE

2015 (8) TMI 1316 - CESTAT BANGALORE - 2016 (339) E.L.T. 90 (Tri. - Bang.) - 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 cas .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

umar Arya, Technical Member. Ms. L. Maithali, Adv. for the Appellant. Mr. N. 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 cleare .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cture of refuse which attracted NIL rate of duty and as such the benefit of captive 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 dat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ee is engaged in the manufacture of Cigarette. During the course of manufacture 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 .....

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