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: 25 Mar, 2013
Print   |    |  Comment

Patta Patti manufacturers: Tempted to opt Cenvat Scheme

Patta Patti manufacturers: Tempted to opt Cenvat Scheme

 
 

An article by:-
CA. Pradeep Jain
CA. Preeti Parihar
Ankit Palgauta
 

Introduction:-
 

Compounded levy scheme was introduced in the Central Excise Law with the duty of Rs. 10000/- per machine per month in the year 1994. The scheme was simple with reasonable amount of duty, as such a no. of manufacturers of stainless steel patta-patti switched to it. Later on this duty was increased to Rs. 15000/- and then to Rs. 30000/-. Now, this duty has been increased to Rs. 40000/- vide notification no. 5/2013-CE dated 1.3.2013. The increase in duty amount in the compound levy indicates that this step of government is going to decrease the popularity of this scheme in the stainless steel industry. This piece of writing is about the implications of this amendment on the stainless steel industry.

 
Product chain in stainless steel (SS) industry:-
 

The end product of SS industry is utensils which are manufactured by following process:-
·        The initial input is the SS scrap which is converted into flats.
·        Flats are subjected to process of hot rolling and the resultant product is hot rolled patta patti.
·        Hot rolled patta patti are processed in cold rolling mills, the resultant product being cold rolled patta patti.
·        The cold rolled patta patti are converted into circles.
·        The circles are used in the manufacture of the utensils.
The compounded levy is levied on the intermediate process of cold rolling.

 
Situation prior to budget, 2011:-
 

There was no excise duty on the utensils by virtue of Notification no. 10/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006. The circles used in the manufacture of utensils was also exempted vide Notification no. 3/2005-CE dated 24-2-2005. Thus, the buyers of cold rolled patta pattis were not concerned whether the excise duty is charged on their invoice or not as in any case the excise duty was forming the part of their cost. This was the prime reason for which most of the manufacturers of the patta patti had opted for compounded levy. Besides this, the compound levy was simple involving less procedural formalities with reasonable amount of duty.

 
Situation after budget, 2011:-
 

Budget, 2011 has brought the excise duty on the utensils @ 1% under Notification no. 1/2011-CE dated 1.3.2011 on the condition that no credit is availed. Also an option was given in this budget to pay the excise duty on utensils @ 5% under Notification no. 2/2011-CE dated 1.3.2011 alongwith the facility of Cenvat credit. Since 1% duty was not a big deal, most of the manufacturers have opted for it rather than going for 5% duty with Cenvat. Thus, even after budget, 2011; though duty was imposed on utensils, the manufacturers did not require the Cenvat credit, as such, there was no impact on the manufacturers of cold rolled patta patti.

 
Situation after budget, 2012:-
 

The duty of 1% was increased to 2% on the utensils in budget, 2012. Simultaneously, the duty of 5% with Cenvat was also increased to 6% in this budget. As a result of this increase, big players of this industry where start to finish process i.e. cold rolling as well as utensils was carried out either in the same factory or within the same group companies; had already switched to Cenvat scheme. If the same cold rolling as well as utensils were manufactured in same premises then there was no problem in switching to Cenvat scheme. But if the manufacture of cold rolled as well as utensils were undertaken in separate premises or separate entities then they were following the job work procedure. However, the other manufacturers working alone were stuck to the compounded levy and those manufacturing the utensils were still paying the duty @ 2% on utensils without availing the Cenvat. However, recently announced budget of year 2013 may result into scrapping of the compounded levy scheme in SS industry.

 
Implications of Budget, 2013:-
 

Budget, 2013 has increased the duty under compounded levy scheme by Rs. 10000/-, now the effective duty under this scheme is Rs. 40000/- per machine per month. This is substantial increase after the increase in duty on utensils in previous budget. As already stated the big players have already switched to Cenvat scheme.  Obviously, the cost of utensils manufactured by these companies will be low as they are availing the Cenvat at full rate and paying the concessional duty @ 6% only. However, those manufacturer who are paying the duty on utensils @ 2% without Cenvat will find it tough to survive as the excise duty paid by the manufacturers of patta patti, whether in compounded levy (which has increased substantially) or in normal scheme, is forming the part of their cost.
Under above circumstances, there are two options available with the manufacturers of utensils:-
 
(i)                To purchase the flats as inputs and avail the Cenvat credit. Thereafter, get them processed in cold rolling mill on job work basis. Utilize the cold rolled patta patti in manufacture of circles and utensils thereafter and clear the same on payment of duty.

(ii)              To get the SS patta patti from the manufacturer who is operating under Cenvat scheme. Avail the Cenvat, manufacture and clear utensils on payment of excise duty @ 6%.
 
The second option hereabove will not be followed by the manufacturers as there is direct outflow in form of excise duty and the only option available will be the option 1 hereabove. Thus, in any case, the utensil manufacturers will prefer to procure the flats and send it to for job work, rather than purchasing the same from patta patti manufacturers. Since the increased duty on compounded levy will ultimately increase the cost of such manufacturers (additional burden of increase in compound levy duty as well as direct outflow of 2%). Thus, the only feasible option will be to purchase the flats and get the cold rolled patta patti manufacture on the job work basis.

 
While Concluding:-
 

At the time of introduction, the compounded levy scheme under SS industry was very attractive. This attraction was also due the fact that the end product “utensils” were exempted. However, this attraction faded to some extent after the announcement of budget, 2011 when the duty was imposed on the utensils. After levy of duty on utensils, it has faced the increase by 1% in the previous budget which has let many of the utensil manufacturers to shift to Cenvat scheme. Now the substantial increase in the duty under compounded levy scheme also indicates the dimming attraction of this scheme...

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