EXCISE
Externally Procured Parts Supplied To Customer For Assembly, But Not Used By Manufacturer, Aren't Liable To Excise Duty : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (November 10) dismissed the Revenue Department's excise duty demand against a company that had manufactured and erected a large boiler at a customer's site, holding that the full contract value could not be subjected to central excise duty. The Court clarified that parts bought out externally and supplied to the customer for assembly, but not actually used by the manufacturer, would not attract excise duty. “we arrive at the finding that the final product that...
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Patanjali Foods' Rs 2.97 Crore Excise Duty Refund Appeal
The Supreme Court has recently issued notice in an appeal filed by Patanjali Foods Limited (formerly Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd.) seeking a refund of Rs 2.97 crore charged by the tax department in connection with an excise duty dispute. A Division Bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Atul S Chandurkar issued notice on both the main appeal and the application seeking condonation of delay. The appeal challenges the Karnataka High Court's judgment dated September 30, 2024, and...
Refund Claims Are Time-Barred Despite Non-Obstante Clause U/S 142(5) CGST Act: CESTAT Rejects Mahindra Holidays' Appeal
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the Non-Obstante Clause in Section 142(5) of the CGST Act (Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) cannot override the limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. Ajayan T.V. (Judicial Member) and M. Ajit Kumar (Technical Member) stated that section 142(5) does not refer to overriding any particular provision, and hence the non obstante clause has to be examined and given a...
Customs | Drawback Cannot Be Denied On Grounds Of Alleged Forgery By Foreign Buyer Once Goods Are Exported: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that drawback cannot be denied on the grounds of alleged forgery by a foreign buyer after goods are exported under the Customs & Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules 1995. The single bench consists of (Judicial Member) opined that any forgery, if revealed during a further investigation being committed by the Russian company vis-a-vis the Landing certificate in the light of Drawback...
CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty Demand Against Wipro Over Tamil Nadu Govt's Free Laptop Scheme
The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in Chennai on Wednesday quashed the excise department's demand for additional duty from Wipro Ltd., ruling that the company's supply of laptops to the Tamil Nadu government for free distribution to students cannot be treated as a commercial sale and therefore cannot be taxed at retail price. A two-member bench comprising Judicial Member P Dinesha and Technical Member M Ajit Kumar said the case was covered by an earlier...
Curtain Glass Affixed To Building Not Removable, Hence Not Liable To Central Excise Duty: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that curtain glass/ structural glazing affixed to building not removable, hence not liable to central excise duty. Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) were addressing the issue of whether the curtain glass fixed by the assessee in the form of works contract on the walls of buildings can be charged to central excise duty. In this case, the...
Excise Duty Exemption Not Available On Industrial Sewing Machines With In-Built Motors: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that excise duty exemption not available on industrial sewing machines with in-built motors. Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) were addressing the issue of whether the assessee is entitled to the benefit of exemption Notification No. 6/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006 (S. No. 15) and its successor Notification No. 1/2011CE dated 1.3.2011 (S. No. 97) on the ...
No Excise Duty On Manufacture Of Drip Irrigation System And Its Component Parts: CESTAT
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that no excise duty on manufacture of drip irrigation system and its component parts. S.K. Mohanty (Judicial Member) and M.M. Parthiban (Technical Member) observed that the impugned goods viz., polytubes, microtubes, HDPE pipes were used for Drip irrigation systems, the appropriate classification in terms of the CBEC circular dated 16.03.1998 would be under sub-heading no. 8424.91, and not...
Loose Sheets And Private Diaries Not Sufficient Evidence For Excise Duty Demand: CESTAT
The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that loose sheets and private diaries is not sufficient evidence for excise duty demand. R. Muralidhar (Judicial Member) and Rajeev Tandon (Technical Member) stated that mere tallying of certain entries, does not make out these loose sheets to be complete evidence of the purchases and sales and other details pertaining to the assessee. In this case, the assessee/Appellant is manufacturer of...
GST TRAN-I Credit Can Be Revised Based On Manually Filed Excise Return: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court held that GST TRAN-I credit can be revised based on manually filed ER-1 Return. Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain stated that “there were technical issues with respect to revising TRAN-1 and non-availability of electronic mode to revise excise return and it is only after directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. 2022 that the assessee was able to revise its TRAN-1/TRAN-2 by filing manual revised...
Interest On Delayed Refund Is Statutorily Mandated After 3 Months: CESTAT Applies 6% Interest U/S 11BB Of Central Excise Act
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that interest on delayed refund is statutorily mandated after 3 months under Section 11BB Of Central Excise Act. Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 mandates that if a duty refund is not processed within three months from the receipt of an application, the applicant is entitled to interest on the delayed amount. It empowers Central Government to fix rate between 5-30% through...