Excise – Cestat Ahmedabad: As the Appellant after following the proper procedure has paid the duty assessed by the Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner fixing annual capacity of production after the replacement of packing machines, on this ground demand is prima facie not sustainable – Appeal allowed [Order attached]

Your free trial / membership plan is expired.
Kindly subscribe to get complete access to indirect tax updates and issue wise cases
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates and download copy of case laws/ notification/ circular etc.
Be a part of our WhatsApp group and read real time indirect tax updates
Access to ready case laws of General Issues and Industry Wide Issues under GST
Access to relevant provisions of law / circular in respect to the issues, along with trail of their amendments
Write your GST query to us for evaluation
Subscription Charges:*
Indirect tax updates -
6 months @299 / 1 Year @499 only
Indirect tax updates + Issue wise cases -
6 months @1199 / 1 Year @1999 only
*Plus applicable GST
Admin
23-Dec-2022 13:24:15
Order date – 22 December 2022
Facts –
- The Appellant, Chandan Tobacco Co, are engaged in the manufacture of Pan Masala and Pan Masala containing Tobacco (Gutka) falling under Chapter Sub–headings No. 21069020 and 24039990 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
- A show cause notice was issued that the appellant has not paid any Central Excise Duty in respect of the new packing machines added during the relevant month on the ground that the number of old packing machine have been replaced with equal number machines and the total number of installed packing machines remained unchanged during the said relevant months.
Issue –
- Whether the appellant is required to pay duty on replacing old packing machines?
Order –
- The Tribunal held that all the required procedure in replacing the old packing was followed by the Appellant and the same is not under dispute, therefore, the application of Rule 8 does not arise and no duty demand is sustainable in this matter. Therefore considering Rule 10 also the appellants are entitled to abatement.
- In the present case, it is seen that the Appellant after following the proper procedure paid the duty assessed by the Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner fixing annual capacity of production after the replacement of packing machines, however no action was taken by the department to modify these orders by filing review application or appeal. On this ground also demand is prima facie not sustainable.
- Hence the appeal is allowed.
Related Post
Post Category
Your free trial/ membership plan has expired. Kindly subscribe to get complete access of tax news updates.
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates
Access to the Order Copy of the case law/ Notification/ Circular etc
Be a part of our Whatsapp group and read real time tax updates
Access to ready case laws/ circulars on general and industry-wide issues under GST
Submit your GST issues to us for evaluation