GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 475 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2016 (9) TMI 475 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - 2016 (342) E.L.T. 305 (Tri. - Ahmd.) - Whether the Appellant would be eligible to discharge duty @ 16% as per tariff rate or the benefit of Notification No.6/2002-CE, dt.01.03.2002 be allowed in calculating the duty liability on the cleared quantity of 26157.600 kgs of Textured yarn - period involved is 01.04.2002 to 07.06.2002 - Held that:- from the impugned order we could not notice any observation on the evidentiary value of the CA certificate and its 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

dingly, in the interest of justice, we remand the matter to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the issues afresh after considering all evidences on record and the evidences that would be produced by the Appellant and in particular the acceptability or otherwise of the CA Certificate. - Appeal disposed of - Appeal No. E/1198, 1199/2008-DB - Order No. A/10410-10411/2016 - Dated:- 16-5-2016 - Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) And Mr. P.M. Saleem, Member (Technical) For the Appellants: Shri Mu .....

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 note book allegedly contained clearances without payment of duty. On completion of investigation, it was noticed that the Appellant had removed 26157.60 kgs of finished Textured Yarn clandestinely without payment of duty during the period from 01.04.2002 to 07.06.2002. Consequently, a Show Cause-cum Demand Notice was issued to them on 28.04.2005 for recovery of duty of ₹ 4,71,675.00 and proposition for imposition of penalty on the Appellant company; also personal penalty on the second Ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent appeals. 3. Learned Chartered Accountant Shri Mukund Chauhan for the Appellant submits that the authorities below had wrongly denied the benefit of Notification No.06/2002-CE, dt.01.03.2002 in calculating the duty liability, even though the Appellant company had satisfied the conditions of the said notification viz. POY used in the manufacture of Textured Yarn had suffered duty and also they have not availed CENVAT Credit on the said POY. It is his contention that after the records were seiz .....

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.01.03.2002 as amended in computing their duty liability. 4. It is his contention that the details of POY received, consumed in the manufacture of textured yarn including the clearances of 26157.60 kgs during the said period had been submitted in the reply to the Show Cause Notice. It is their grievance that the authorities below, without any contrary evidence on record, erroneously rejected the purchase invoices issued by M/s Parsrampuria Synthetics Ltd. It is their argument that the quantity .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s his submission that in any case since both the authorities below had not allowed the Appellant to pay 25% of the penalty imposed under Sec.11AC of CEA,1944 on fulfillment necessary conditions in view of the decision of the Hon ble Gujrat High Court in the case of CCE Vs Harish Silk Mills 2010 (255) ELT 393 (Guj.) and CCE Vs G.P.Presstress Concrete Works 2015 (323) ELT 709 (Guj), they are eligible to the same. 5. Per contra, the learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue took us through .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hased the POY to manufacture the goods cleared clandestinely. Even though this statement was retracted on 17.10.2003, but the same being an after thought action hence not acceptable. It is his contention that the Appellant could not adduce sufficient evidences in this regard, therefore, they are not eligible to the benefit of the Notification. He contended that it is brought out in the SCN and OIO that the opening balance of POY shown in Form IV Register as on 01.04.2002 was only 4803.750 Kgs. 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

Textured Yarn without payment of duty. The principal issue which needs to be addressed is: whether the Appellant would be eligible to discharge duty @ 16% as per tariff rate or the benefit of Notification No.6/2002-CE, dt.01.03.2002 be allowed in calculating the duty liability on the cleared quantity of 26157.600 kgs of Textured yarn. On perusal of the said Notification, it is clear that two conditions need to be satisfied so as to be eligible to the benefit of said notification. These are name .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tatement dt.08.06.2002 stated that the said quantity of finished goods were manufactured from POY purchased in cash from the market, but the said statement was claimed to have been under pressure and without verification of the proper data. Hence, subsequently, through their letter dt.02.09.2002, the purchase of 23540.700 kgs of POY from M/s Parsurampuria Synthetics against three duty paid excise invoices was submitted and this fact was confirmed by Shri Ratanlal Mahavirprasad Daruka in his subs .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ty of removal of Textured Yarn i.e. 26,167.600 kgs even after adding 1.75% as the quantity towards oil gain, which works out to only 23,952 kgs. In other words, both the authorities below had arrived at the finding that the Appellants had not adduced sufficient evidence to establish that the POY used in the manufacture of 26,167.600kgs of textured yarn had suffered duty. The claim of the Appellants, on the other hand was that they had produced evidences including the CA certificate to show 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

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

12-7-2017 UTGST Rate

12-7-2017 UTGST Rate

12-7-2017 IGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

7-7-2017 Income Tax

7-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

More Circulars



|| 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