News Update

India, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEAThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCBDT substitutes Form in ITR-5EV Revolution: Lessons for India to learn from US and China!London court green-signals auction of luxury apartment of fugitive Nirav ModiGovt consults RBI; finalises borrowing plan for first half of FY 2024-25Gadkari says Farmers’ protest is politically-motivatedVP calls upon women entrepreneurs to be 'Vocal for Local'America offers USD 10 mn bounty for information on ‘Blackcat’ hackers after UnitedHealth gets hitI-T- The order of the ITSC can only be reopened in cases of fraud or misrepresentation: HC8 persons including Hezbollah militants killed in Israeli strike on LebanonI-T - Income so surrendered on account of investment in excess stock during course of survey cannot be brought to tax under deeming provisions of section 69B: ITATMacron pillories EU-South Africa trade deal; calls it ‘really bad’ in BrazilI-T-Power of revision need not be exercised where facts do not reveal any lack of enquiry by AO into relevant issue & when twin requirements of order being erroneous as well as prejudicial to Revenue's interests, are not satisfied: ITATThailand’s Lower House okays Bill to legitimise same-sex marriageI-T -Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed where an assessee claims deduction u/s 80P while being ineligible therefor, but being under the bona fide impression of being eligible for such benefit : ITATYellen warns China against clean energy dumpingCus - Enhancement of declared value of imported goods is not tenable, where Department adduces no material to show how the enhanced value was computed & where no cogent rationale is made out for rejecting declared value: CESTATMilky Way’s central black hole - Twisted magnetic field observedCus - Assessee has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that goods in question imported under air way bills/bills of entry were in fact filed by him and hence the only natural corollary available to Revenue is confiscation of same: CESTATSmall investors help Trump Media’s valuation skyrocket to USD 13 billionST - When the facts are in the knowledge of department subsequent SCN alleging suppression cannot be issued and entire demand was found beyond normal period of limitation: CESTATFM Nirmala Sitharaman declines to contest LS elections as she has no fundsST - Tripura State Rifles not required to pay Service Tax under heading of Security Services, as it is is not engaged in business of providing security services: CESTATJustice Ritu Raj Awasthi joins as Judicial member of LokpalCX - Clandestine removal alleged based on consumption of raw inputs and heightened electricity usage - Tax demands based on third party statements but without permitting cross examination of deponents; case remanded to allow this exercise: CESTAT
 
CX - Erroneous payment of duty on exempted goods does not make them non-exempted - No error in order of Tribunal in allowing exemption under Notification No 89/95 to waste & scrap arising in manufacture of such goods: HC

By TIOL News Service

CHENNAI, JULY 01, 2015: THIS is a revenue appeal against the order of Tribunal reported in 2007-TIOL-1709-CESTAT-MAD. The first respondent Integral Coach Factory (ICF) is engaged in the business of manufacturing passenger coaches both self-propelled and non-propelled, steel freight containers and parts of passenger coaches for railways under Chapter 86 of CET 1985. They are availing exemption under Notification No.62/95 CE dated 16.3.1995. Alleging that ICF had cleared ferrous and non-ferrous scrap without payment of Central Excise duty, show cause notice was issued proposing to demand duty along with interest and penalty. The first respondent/assessee replied to the said show cause notice stating that they are eligible for exemption under Notification No.89/95 CE dated 18.5.1995. The Adjudicating Authority, after due process of law, passed an order confirming the demand holding that the assessee was not eligible to claim the benefit of exemption under Notification No.89/95 CE dated 18.5.1995. Aggrieved by the said order of adjudication, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after considering the Notification and the proviso and Explanation to the Notification allowed the claim of the assessee.

After hearing both sides, the High Court dismissed the appeal by holding that:

The Tribunal rightly held that proviso to the Notification ( which reads - provided that nothing contained in this Notification shall apply to waste, paring and scrap cleared from a factory in which any other excisable goods other than exempted goods are cleared) would not apply to the facts of the case and the erroneous payment of duty would not render the goods other than exempted goods. So long as the goods manufactured are exempted goods, waste parings, scrap arising in the course of the manufacture of exempted goods would be entitled for exemption as per Notification No.89 of 1995 CE dated 18.5.1995. This finding of the Tribunal is approved as correct.

(See 2015-TIOL-1526-HC-MAD-CX)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023