Feedback   New User   Subscription   Demo   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner, Central Excise, Ghaziabad Versus International Tobacco Company Ltd.

2018 (2) TMI 779 - CESTAT, ALLAHABAD

Liability of duty - dummy packs - classification - Held that: - the dummy packs were not marketable, since they were not capable of being bought and sold in the market because they were advertising material of the assessee - dummy packs did not attract Central Excise duty. - Since the question of dutiability does not arise, the question of classification of the said goods under chapter 48 and 49 does not arise. - Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/2374-2375, 2843 & 2845/2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

volved in above stated four appeals is the same. Therefore, they are taken together for decision. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s International Tobacco Company Ltd. was engaged in manufacture of cut-tobacco falling under Tariff Item No. 24039970 and different brands of Cigarettes falling under Tariff Items Nos.240222010, 24022020, 24022030 and 24022040 of schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. M/s International Tobacco procured inputs such as Shells, Slides, BOPP, TOR, CFC, etc. fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le (3) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Assessee contended that while removing the inputs for making dummy packs they were reversing the Cenvat credit availed on said inputs and further that the dummy packs are not marketable and therefore, they were not excisable. However, they complied with the said instructions and started paying amount under said Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 6. Subsequently, jurisdictional Central Excise officer through his letter dated 05.09.2005 took objection to payment of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0.2009 wherein the demand was confirmed. Aggrieved by the said order, M/s International Tobacco preferred appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals). Learned Commissioner (Appeals) through the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 31.03.2010 decided the appeal, wherein the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the dummy packs were dutiable under chapter 49 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Aggrieved by the said order, M/s International Tobacco has preferred appeals before this Tribunal. Furt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appeal against the said Order-in-Original dated 30.10.2009. It was decided through the Order-in-Appeal dated 31.03.2010. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the value of dummy packs should be decided as per Rule 8 of valuation rules on the basis of CAS-IV certificate that is on the basis of cost of manufacture. Further, he dispensed with the penalty imposed in the Order-in-Original. Aggrieved by the said order, M/s International Tobacco is in appeal before this Tribunal. Further, re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version