News Update

SARFAESI Act - Award of interest on auction money at rate applicable to fixed deposits is not a correct view and rate of interest deserves to be enhanced: SC (See 'TIOLCorplaws')ST - Chit Funds - Tax was not paid under mistake of law but upon demand by tax authorities - Refund not having been filed within time was rightly rejected: HCGST - Without considering the reply on merits, proper officer, without applying his mind has held that the reply is filed is unsatisfactory and, therefore, he is left with no alternative but to create demand - Order set aside and matter remitted: HCGST - Cancellation of registration retrospectively - Show Cause Notice and the impugned order are bereft of any details, accordingly the same cannot be sustained: HCGST - Registration could not have been cancelled retrospectively for the period for which returns were filed and taxpayer was compliant: HCGST - Notfn 11/2017-CTR amended by 03/2022-CTR - Work contracts executed before 18 July 2022 - Petitioners should file refund claims before respondent authorities agitating their grievance and the same be examined and orders passed within four months: HCItaly imposes USD 10 mn fine on Amazon for unfair business practicesGST - Entire tax liability has been realised by appropriating the amount from the petitioner's bank account, therefore, Revenue interest stands fully secured - Since tax proposal was confirmed without participation of petitioner, order set aside and matter remanded: HCCaste Census is my mission, says RahulRight to Sleep - A Legal lullabyUS warns Pak of punitive sanctions against trade deal with IranI-T- Income surrendered before approaching Settlement Commission not covered u/s 115BBE, where this provision did not exist during relevant AYs: HCChinese companies decry anti-subsidy probe by EUI-T- Entire interest expenditure is allowable as deduction if loan funds is not diverted for non-income earning activities/personal purposes : ITATUK’s key water supplier, Thames Water, slips into financial quagmireI-T- Sale consideration cannot be considered as unexplained cash credit if sale takes place in online platform and sale consideration is received through stock broker in banking channels : ITATUK to send military aid package worth USD 619 mn to UkraineI-T- Section 69C includes expenditures reflected in account books, as well as those discovered during Search & Seizure for which no valid explanation is forthcoming from assessee: ITATUS regulator bans non-compete agreements by employeesI-T- Penalty imposed u/s 273B upheld where assessee unable to provide just cause for failure to file audit report within prescribed due date as per Section 44AB: ITATPalestinian PM unveils new reform packageI-T- Assessee cannot contest validity of penalty notice on grounds of irrelevant provision not being struck off, by highlighting such defect for the first time before ITAT itself: ITATAir India, Nippon Airways join hands for travel between India and JapanGovt receives 7 bids for giga-scale Advanced Chemistry Cell under PLI10 killed as two Malaysian Military copters crashI-T- Lower authorities erred in disallowing long term capital loss : ITATSC grills Baba Ramdev & Balkrishna in misleading ad case1351 candidates to contest in phase 3 of LS ElectionsI-T- Revisionary order u/s 263 invalidated where passed in ignorance of repeated factual submissions to prove that original assessment order is not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue's interests: ITATIndian Coast Guard, Oman Coast Guard to jointly combat transnational illegal activities at seaST - Department cannot retain any amount which is otherwise not payable by the Assessee; nothing acts as embargo on assessee's right to demand refund of tax paid under misaken notion: CESTATAFMS, ICMR join hands to undertake biomedical research for Armed ForcesCus - If noticee seeks Cross Examination of such persons, same should be granted, appellant will produce all documentary evidence before Adjudicating Authority in support of their claim that seized gold is part of their normally procured gold in course of their commercial transactions: CESTAT
 
Notification No. 34/2015-CE causes mighty problems for Notfn. 30/2004-CE

JULY 21, 2015

By Keshav Maloo, CA

YARN and textile fabrics specified in Notification No. 30/04-CE were until now exempt from duty subject to the condition that no credit is taken on corresponding inputs. The proviso prescribing this condition is reproduced herebelow for the sake of ready reference:

"Provided that nothing contained in this notification shall apply to the goods in respect of which credit of duty on inputs has been taken under the provisions of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002"

The above said proviso has now been amended by Notification No. 34/2015-CE dated 17.07.2015 which reads as under:

"Provided that the said excisable goods are manufactured from inputs on which appropriate duty of excise leviable under the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act or additional duty of customs under section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) has been paid and no credit of such excise duty or additional duty of customs on inputs has been taken by the manufacturer of such goods (and not the buyer of such goods), under the provisions of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.".

Accordingly, until 16.07.2015 exemption was available under Notification No. 30/04-CE subject to satisfying the condition that credit on inputs is not taken. It was not relevant whether inputs were duty paid, exempt or chargeable to nil rate of duty or whether purchased from trader.

However, with this amendment, one more additional condition has been added and now w.e.f. 17.07.2015, a manufacturer wishing to avail exemption under Notification No. 30/04-CE, as amended, would be required to additionally satisfy and establish that inputs used by him are those on which appropriate duty of excise has been paid.

It is a settled law that 'appropriate duty of excise has been paid' would not include those inputs which are exempt or chargeable to nil rate of duty. In other words, payment of appropriate duty requires to establish that duty has been paid on the inputs and that the same are not exempt nor chargeable to nil rate of duty.

The issue has been dealt in detail by Hon'ble S.C. in the case COLLECTOR OF C. EX., VADODARA Versus DHIREN CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES - 2002-TIOL-83-SC-CX-CB and it was held that "emphasis must be given to the words 'has already been paid' meaning thereby that where the raw material is not liable to excise duty or such duty in nil, no excise duty is, as a matter of fact, paid upon it- to goods made out of such material, the notification will not apply".

The crux of the judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:

Exemption (Central Excise) - Notification issued exempting the final products from duty when manufactured from raw material on which duty is already paid - Notification issued to give relief from cascading of excise duty - Provisions of Notification will not apply when raw material is not liable to excise duty or such duty is nil and no excise duty is paid - Usha Martin Industries case - 2002-TIOL-400-SC-CX-LB overruled. (Paras 5,6,7,8)

There is no cascading effect when no excise duty is payable upon the raw material and the hardship that the notification seeks to alleviate does not arise. (Para 8)

Further, after the declaration of above judgment by Hon'ble S.C., the C.B.E.C also modified its earlier stand and followed the judgement by issuing Circular No. 667/58/2002-CX., dated 26-9-2002 in which it was clarified that 'duty paid goods-expression "appropriate duty of excise" not to include nil duty'. Accordingly, now, in our opinion, the exemption under Notification No. 30/04-CE as amended, by Notification No. 34/2015-CE dated 17.07.2015 would be available only if following two conditions are satisfied:

1. The manufacturer receives inputs on payment of duty and further keeps in possession the duty paying documents issued by manufacturer of inputs. Further, the duty should not be exempt or nil.

In case, inputs are purchased from trader, in that case, traders are suggested to be registered in Central excise so that they can mention authentically the duty paid particulars of the manufacturer.

Further, this would apply to all the inputs.

2. No credit of such duty paid on inputs is taken.

Practically, the above amendment means that textile would come out of the optional duty regime and would be forced to come into duty chain.

Further, the Board's Circular No. 680/71/2002-CX, dated 10-12-2002 issued in the context of Notification No. 14/2002 and the judgement in the case of SUDITI INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BELAPUR reported at - 2013-TIOL-1020-CESTAT-MUM also delivered in the context of Notification No. 14/2002-CE, would not apply to the present amendment in Notification because of the reason that the explanation II in Notification No. 14/2002-CE had a totally different wordings. This explanation in the earlier Notification was clarifying that textiles fibres, yarns and fabrics brought from the market were deemed to have been duty paid. There is no such explanation in the present case.

Unless amended or clarified contrary, in our opinion, exemption is not available in Notification No. 30/04-CE, if the above two conditions are not satisfied.

(DISCLAIMER : The views expressed are strictly of the author and Taxindiaonline.com doesn't necessarily subscribe to the same. Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. is not responsible or liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any interpretation, error, omission in the articles being hosted on the sites)

POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.