CESTAT
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...
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...
Notional Cost Of Maruti's Free Designs Supplied To Vendors Not Dutiable Under Central Excise: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that notional cost of Maruti's free designs supplied to vendors not dutiable under Central Excise. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) was addressing the issue whether the notional cost of drawings and designs supplied free of cost by Maruti to the vendor should be included in the assessable value of parts or components manufactured by vendor and...
Packing/Re-Packing Of Parts Of Device Is Not Manufacture U/S 2(f)(iii) Of Central Excise Act; No Excise Duty: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that packing/re-packing of parts of vibrator compactor is not manufacture under Section 2(f)(iii) Of Central Excise Act and hence no excise duty is leviable. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) was addressing the issue of whether the two constructions equipments namely Wheeled Tractor Loader Backhoe and Vibratory Compactor are “Automobiles”, ...
Admissibility Of Printouts From Seized Electronic Evidence Requires Certificate U/S 36B Of Central Excise Act: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that admissibility of printouts from seized electronic evidence requires certificate under Section 36B of the Central Excise Act. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that, “that a printout generated from a secondary electronic evidence that has been seized, cannot be admitted in evidence unless the statutory conditions laid down in section...
“Pendants” Described As Jewellery Are Not Distinguishable On Basis Of Purity Of Gold, No Exemption From Excise Duty: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that there is no exemption on the articles described as pendants as the jewellery is not distinguishable on the basis of purity of gold. The Bench of Bintu Tamta (Judicial) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical) has observed that, “The contention of the assessee that articles of jewellery do not cover pendant of 24 CARAT within its purview is misleading and unsustainable as nowhere in the Chapter...
Student Almanac And Teacher Planner Not Exigible To Excise Duty: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that Student Almanac and teacher planner not exigible to excise duty. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that the submission of the assessee that since Student Almanac is used only by students of a particular school, it becomes a product of printing industry cannot be accepted. In this case, the issue in dispute is regarding the...
Amount Deposited As Service Tax If Refundable, Should Not Be Treated As Pre-Deposit U/S 35F Central Excise Act: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the amount deposited as service tax, if refundable, should not be treated as pre-deposit under Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944. “Section 11B provides for refund of duty or service tax. If an amount is already paid as duty or service tax, it is reckoned while computing if any further amount needs to be paid to meet the mandatory requirement of pre-deposit under section 35F. Merely...
Mere Wrong Availment Of Exemption Notification Does Not Mean That Availment Was Done To Evade Payment Of Central Excise Duty: CESTAT
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that mere wrong availment of exemption notification does not mean that availment was done to evade payment of central excise duty. The Bench of Dilip Gupta (President) and P. V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that, “Mere wrong availment of an Exemption Notification would not lead to a conclusion that it was with an intent to evade payment of central excise duty unless the department is...
'Activity Did Not Involve Any Manufacturing, Central Excise Duty Was Collected Illegally': CESTAT Orders Refund
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has granted a refund along with interest, despite the absence of a statutory provision for interest under central excise laws at the relevant time. The Bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that “the amount collected by way of Central excise duty was illegal as the activity itself did not involve any manufacture and the same cannot be allowed to be...
Excise Duty Not Payable On 'Bagasse' Which Emerges As A Waste Product During Sugar Crushing: CESTAT
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that excise duty is not payable on the Bagasse emerged as waste product during sugar crushing. The Bench of Ajayan T.V. (Judicial Member) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical Member) has observed that Bagasse emerged only as a waste product during crushing of sugarcane during the manufacturing process and though marketable, duty could not be imposed on it as there was no manufacturing activity...