Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments
Publish Date: 05 Jun, 2007
Print   |    |  Comment

PAYMENT OF DUTY ON NEW COLD ROLLING MACHINES FOR PATTA-PATTI MANUFACTURERS

PAYMENT OF DUTY ON NEW COLD ROLLING MACHINES FOR PATTA-PATTI MANUFACTURERS
 
            The manufacturers of stainless steel patta-patti are covered under special procedure contained in Rule 96 ZA to Rule 96 ZGG of Central Excise Rules. They are currently paying duty at the rate of Rs. 15000/- per cold rolling machine per month. This article ponders over the payment of duty on new machine installed in the factory premises of such manufacture.
 
            As per provisions of Rule 96ZC(3),any manufacturer has to intimate as well as obtain permission before making any change in number of machines installed in the factory premises. The duty is payable as per provisions of Rule 96ZC(2) which is only charging provisions. This Rule reads as follows: -
 
            “The sum payable as under sub-rule (1) shall be calculated by application of such rate to the maximum number of cold rolling machines installed by or on behalf of such manufacturer in one or more premises at any time during three calendar months immediately preceding the calendar month in which the application under Rule 96 ZC is made.”
 
            Also, the manufacturer has to deposit duty and apply to Central Excise Department for the permission for clearance of patta-patti from his factory for ensuing month as per provisions of Rule 96 ZC (1) ibid. The Rule is enumerated below: -
 
            “Such manufacturer shall, at any time during the calendar month immediately preceding any month of part thereof, as the case may be, in respect of which he has been permitted to avail himself of the provisions of this section, make an application to the proper officer in the proper Form for leave to remove [stainless steel/pattas, or aluminium circles] from his premises during he ensuing month, declaring therein the maximum number of cold rolling machines installed by him or on his behalf, in one or more premises at any time during three calendar months immediately preceding the calendar month in which application is made.
 
            Now, we look at a practical example. Suppose, a manufacturer is operating with two machines seeks permission from the department in the month of July- 2000 for starting third new machine from August-2000 as per provisions of Rule 96 ZC (3). He will file application AR-8AA (prescribed under Rule 96 ZC (1)) with the department at the end of calendar month of July-2000 along with calculation of number of machines. The three proceeding months immediately preceding the calendar month of July-2000 will be June-2000, May-2000 and April-2000. The maximum number of machines will be two only. As such, he has to pay duty for two machines only.
 
            Similarly, during the next month he will deposit duty for September-2000 at the end of August-2000. The immediate preceding three calendar months to said calendar month (August-2000) will be July-2000, June-2000 and May-2000. The maximum number of cold rolling machines in these months will be two only as the new machine gas started in August-2000.
 
            Thereafter, he will deposit duty at the end of September-2000 for the month of October-2000. The three preceding calendar month will be August-2000, July-2000 and June-2000 and number of machines will be as under: -
 
Month
No. of Machines
August-2000
Three
July-2000
Two
June-2000
Two
 
            So, he has to deposit the duty for three machines being the maximum number of machines. So, it is ample clear that he need not to pay duty for continuous two months even if the machine is started by him. In this case, the machine is started in August-2000 but he is paying duty for the month of October-2000.
 
            Furthermore, the argument advanced that the existing set of Rules does not contain any provision for new machine is baseless because the calculation of maximum number of machine implies the change in number of machines. Otherwise, it does not have any meaning. So, the manufacturer need not to pay duty from the starting of machine itself. But the department has deployed its old weapon of seeking clarification from Board and asking the assessee to pay duty till the clarification is received. Let us wait for clarification and pray to God so that it might be received in years to come.
 
 
 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
 

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