GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (7) TMI 483 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2017 (7) TMI 483 - CESTAT CHENNAI - TMI - SSI exemption - time limitation - Held that: - As the appellants have cleared the finished products by paying duty on the assessable value arrived after including the amortized cost of free items, it is evident that the appellants are guilty of suppression of facts. Therefore, SCN issued invoking the extended period of limitation in our view is proper - demand upheld - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - E/196/2006 - Final Order No. 40968/201 .....

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 supplied free of cost to the appellants, the items such as Moulds, Stickers/Labels, BOPP Tape etc., required for the manufacture of finished products viz., HDPE Containers. The terms and conditions entered and agreed by the appellants with oil companies stipulated that these free items should be used exclusively for the manufacture of the finished products supplied to the oil companies. For the period under dispute, the appellants availed quantity based SSI exemption. Though the assessees clea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed to the appellants. After due process of law, the adjudicating authority confirmed the duty demand of ₹ 90,437/- along with interest and imposed penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence, the appellants are before this Tribunal. 2. On behalf of the appellants, Ld. Counsel Shri Akil Suresh, put forward the arguments mainly on the ground of limitation. He submitted that the SCN dated 17.01.2005 which pertains to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pplied by appellant. This being so, the appellants cannot be saddled with intent to evade payment of duty. It was also argued by him that entire duty was paid even before issue of SCN and therefore the authorities below ought not to have imposed penalty. 3. Against this, Ld. AR, Shri S. Govidarajan, AC, reiterated the findings in page-7 of the impugned order and submitted that the appellants have knowingly adopted two different methods to arrive at the assessable value. By one method, they inclu .....

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