Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

Comments

Publish Date: 03 Mar, 2011
Print   |    |  Comment

Article-New Levy on untensils:options with trade published on Taxindiaonline.com

 

                        New levy on utensils: options with trade

CA. Pradeep Jain
CA. Preeti Parihar

Introduction:-

Finance Bill, 2011 has imposed excise duty on a no. of goods that were exempted prior to announcement of Budget. It has withdrawn a no. of exemptions and has imposed the excise duty on them. One such withdrawal of exemption has been done in case of utensils made up of stainless steel and falling under tariff heading 73239420.  

Prior to Budget, 2011; utensils were exempted from payment of excise duty vide serial no. 11 of the Notification no. 10/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006. Now, excise duty has been imposed on the same vide Finance Bill, 2011. The rate of excise duty has been imposed @ 1% under Notification no. 1/2011-CE dated 1.3.2011 and @ 5% vide Notification no. 2/2011-CE dated 1.3.2011.  

The process of manufacturing the utensils:-

The process of manufacture of utensils starts from purchase of SS flats which are converted to patta patti by employing the process of hot rolled and then cold rolled. After applying the cold rolled process, the patta patti is converted to stainless steel circles which are further used for manufacture of utensils. Now, the utensils manufacturers will like to take the Cenvat credit of SS flats @ 10% and pay duty @ 5% so that there is no cash outflow.  
 
The practice employed in industry:-

Thus, for manufacture of utensils prominently two types of manufacturer are there in the industry:-

Category I:-

Those units which procure the duty paid SS flats, take the Cenvat Credit and send them to job worker for carrying out the process of hot rolled and cold rolled. The goods received from the job worker are the cold rolled patta patti that are used by the manufacturer for making the circles that are further used for manufacture of utensils.

Prior to Budget, 2011; these units were not allowed to take the credit as the final product, i.e., utensils were exempt. However, now, such units can avail the Cenvat Credit on SS flats and use the same for paying the excise duty on utensils.

However, the levy of duty on utensils may obsolete the compounded levy scheme if the SS patta patti are get manufactured on the job work. In this case, credit of the SS flats will be taken and then these will be sent to job worker for carrying out cold rolled process. If the job worker is operating under the compounded levy scheme, he may be denied the benefit of this scheme. This is possible due to proviso contained in the notification no. 17/2007-CE dated 1.3.2007 which reads as follows:-

“Provided that no credit of duty paid on any raw materials, component part or machinery or finished products used for cold rolling of stainless steel pattis/pattas, or aluminium circles under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 shall be taken.”

The above proviso says that the credit of raw material used in manufacture of cold rolled rolled patta patti is not taken. In this case, the principle manufacturer has taken the credit of duty paid on SS flats which are sent to the job worker. Thus, the department may interpret that since the credit of duty paid on the raw material has been availed (though by some other person), the compounded levy scheme is not applicable. This interpretation may scrap out the compounded levy scheme.

Further, in this case, the duty has been paid by the job worker on the cold rolled patta patti under compounded levy scheme. These patta pattis are further used in manufacture of the utensils which also suffer the excise duty. Thus, the duty is levied at the two stages of the same product without the facility of Cenvat Credit thereupon. Thus, if we see logically then there is no harm of taking cenvat credit by Utensils manufacturer and manufacturer of SS patta patti operating under Compounded levy scheme. The Government is getting duty twice on the same goods.

If the job work is not allowed to units operating under special provision of compounded levy under notification 17/2009 then the option lie with utensils manufacturers to pay duty @ 1% without Cenvat credit.

Category II:-

Those who carry the entire process of the manufacture of utensils in the same factory, procure the duty paid SS flats that are subject to the process of hot rolled and cold rolled. Then circles are manufactured which are used in manufacture of utensils. Prior to this Budget of 2011, these units were not allowed to take the Cenvat Credit if these were operating under compounded levy scheme. Since the final product utensils and circles used in the manufacture of utensils were exempt duty liability was there on the patta patti. So, if the duty was paid by such manufacturers on patta patti under compounded levy; no credit was allowed. In the same case, if the duty was paid on the patta patti under normal scheme, the credit was allowed on the SS flats.

After Budget, 2011; these units will have no option other than to exit from the compounded levy scheme. In these cases, since the final product utensils have become dutiable, all the intermediate products will get exempted by virtue of notification no. 67/95-CE. So, when the duty is to be paid on utensils, then either the patta patti units will come out of compounded levy scheme or the utensils manufacturer will start taking the credit of SS flats.

Category-III:- These small units are purchasing the Stainless steel patta patti and using them in manufacture of utensils. The patta patti manufacurter are operating under compounded levy scheme. Thus these units will not get the duty paying documents and such units has to opt for paying 1% duty in cash. Moreover, as these units are very small and hence they will be eligible for SSI exemption under notification 8/2003-C.E dated 1.3.2003.  

Before parting:-

Thus, the levy of excise duty on the utensils has direct impact on the compounded levy scheme which is not considered in the Finance Bill, 2011. This may be the reason of initiation of new era of litigation.

************* 

Comments

Post a Comment



Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com