Feedback   New User   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 →

M/s Jaiswal Industries Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad

2018 (2) TMI 781 - CESTAT, ALLAHABAD

Liability of Central Excise Duty - proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - electricity consumed by the appellant during the period from 2007-08 to 2011-12 - Held that: - it was settled principle of law that the electricity consumption cannot be the only factor or basis for determining the duty liability, that too on imaginary basis, especially when Rule 173E mandatorily requires the Commissioner to prescribe/fix norm for electricity consumption first and notif .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ajesh Chhibber, Advocate, for Appellant Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Joint Commissioner (AR), for Respondent Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar The present appeal is direct against Order-in-Original No. MP (Dem.-26/2012) 08 of 2013 dated 26/09/2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Allahabad. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Pipes & Tubes of PVC. They were registered with Central Excise Department w.e.f. 21/11/2011. The Officers .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

em under proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. On contest, the issue was adjudicated through impugned Order-in-Original dated 26/09/2013, wherein the Original Authority confirmed the demand and imposed equal penalty. Aggrieved by the said order appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the ld. Counsel for the appellant, who has taken us through the said Show Cause Notice, particularly computation of demand through table given at Page 7 of the said Show Caus .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is evident from Para 45 of the impugned Order-in-Original, wherein the Original Authority has stated that appellant themselves have accepted that electricity is the prime expense as far as the production is concerned and therefore, on the basis of electricity consumed. The Original Authority confirmed the demand. Ld. Counsel for the appellant has further submitted that Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Versus R. A. Castings Pvt. Ltd. reported at 2011 (269) E.L.T. A108 (S.C.), has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tal units of electricity consumed (in KVAH) Total production of pipes @2.039 kgs/KVAH of electricity consumed Rate per kg. of plastic pipe Value of plastic pipes cleared Central excise duty involved (including Ed. Cess & SHE Cess) 2007-08 133465 272135 Rs.80/- Rs.2,17,70,811 *Rs.9,76,351 2008-09 311821 635803 Rs.80/- Rs.5,08,64,242 *Rs.38,06,574 2009-10 367632 749602 Rs.80/- Rs.5,99,68,132 Rs.36,79,283 2010-11 448476 914443 Rs.80/- Rs.7,31,55,405 Rs.61,40,111 2011-12 (upto Oct. 2011) 248686 .....

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