News Update

I-T - Technical issues faced in filing TDS return online are bona fide reason for delayed filing of TDS returns - penalty not warranted: ITATST - Refund - Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 - No provision in CCR imposes restriction of requirement of registration as condition precedent for claiming CENVAT credit: CESTATMCA invites comments on Draft on cross-border insolvencyCCI gives nod to acquisition of Monsanto by Bayer AGSmuggling racket busted - Delhi DRI nabs 8 persons & seizes gold worth Rs 2.1 CroreIlegal immigration - enlarge labour market to deal with it: OECDShillong is selected as 100th city under Smart City MissionChief Economic Adviser Arvind Subramanian quits on family commitments groundCommerce Minister releases National Strategy for StandardizationComputation of interest - CBDT invites comments on amendment in Rule 10CB (See 'TII Brief')CBDT notifies PFC & Railway Finance Corp 54EC Capital Gains BondsGovt relieves IRS officer Nilimesh Baruah to join CTPA in OECD as Sr AdvisorGST Metered (See 'JEST GST on GST Home Page')J&K is back to Governor's Rule - 4th time in last 10 yearsGST: A Frightening but Fascinating Future world…! – Part II (See 'TOG INSIGHT' on 'Taxongo.com')ST - There is distinction between interest earned by bank and disaggregation of equated monthly instalments earned by financial institution engaged in financial leasing and hire-purchase: CESTATCMs subgroup set up on approaches to Agriculture & MGNREGSST - Fitment within an alternative classification suffices to erase proposal in the notice but cannot crystallize liability unless alternative was also proposed in notice: CESTATAdopt A Heritage Scheme - 6 MoUs are at advanced stageI-T - When statements taken during search are based on documents indicating that assessee collected cash receipts in addition to cheques, such situation comes within sweep of Explanation 5A(b) to Sec. 271(1)(c): ITATGovt targets 5GW wind energy by 2022Notfn. 12/2003-ST speaks of 'value' of materials and not 'cost' of materials - no reason to demand service tax on 10% profit at which material is sold by appellant: CESTATIndia aspires to be USD 10 trillion economy by 2030: DEA Secretarye-Way Bill - Govt introduces Unique Common Enrolment Number facility for transporters registered in many States with same PANCBIC revises new exchange rate for South African RandCBIC grants Non-Functional upgradation on ad hoc basis to 15 officersRailways aims at 2030 to become zero carbon emitterNIFTEM has potential to become Harvard of food processing sector: MinisterGST - Five key aspects GST payers should not miss!Pre-notice Regulations - Boon or Bane?HM calls for expediting online cybercrime reporting portal
 
CX - Cutting and slitting of aluminium foils of jumbo size into smaller size is not taxable: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, MAR 20, 2017: THE appellant sare engaged in the activity of cutting and slitting of aluminum foils of jumbo size into smaller size. They are also engaged in some printing activity on the said foils as well.

A notice was issued to the appellant demanding CE duty on the activity of cutting, slitting and printing of rolls. The demands were confirmed and in appeal, the Tribunal remanded the matter for a decision in the light of the apex court decisions in LML Ltd. and Kores India Ltd . 2004-TIOL-92-SC-CX.

In de novo proceedings, again the demands were confirmed and thus the matter is before the CESTAT for the second time.

The appellant submitted that the issue of cutting and slitting of jumbo rolls of aluminum foil into smaller size has been examined by the Apex Court in SR Tissues Pvt. Ltd. 2005-TIOL-101-SC-CX and it has been held that the said activity does not amount to manufacture; in the case of GTC Industries Ltd. the Bombay High Court has held that the activity of embossing and cutting to shape the duty paid aluminium foil does not result in a distinct marketable commodity and is not an excisable activity. It is further stated that activity of printing was miniscule and within the exemption limit as can be seen from the annexure to the show-cause notice.

The AR submitted that in the case of Kores India Ltd - 2004-TIOL-92-SC-CX the Apex Court has held that cutting and spooling of typewriters/telex ribbons amounting to manufacture. Reliance is also placed on the decision in Sanjay Industrial Corporation & Others - 2015-TIOL-17-SC-CX.

The Bench while distinguishing the decisions cited by the AR observed that the facts involved in both the cases were different. However, the decision of the Apex Court in the case of SR Tissues Pvt. Ltd. (supra) squarely covers the instant case, the Bench added.

The CESTAT further noted - If the cutting and slitting of aluminium foil into roll is not taxable then the activity of printing done by the appellants falls within the SSI exemption limit.

The appeal was allowed.

(See 2017-TIOL-895-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS