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

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/CASE LAW/2015-16/2884

Classification of printing biri wrappers cut to size.

Case:- HEADWAY LITHOGRAPHIC COMPANY VS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., KOLKATA

Citation:- 2015 (321) E.L.T. 394 (S.C.)

Brief Facts:-The appellants herein are printing biri wrappers cut to size and they have been clearing these goods under the Central Excise Act under Chapter sub-heading 4821.00, and the duty under this is Nil. The Department took the view that the case would be classified under Chapter Heading 4823.19 and excise duty at the rate of 20% was payable.
Show cause notice was issued proposing to levy excise duty of Rs. 27 lakhs for the period August, 1994 to March, 1999. After eliciting reply from the appellant, Order-in-Original was passed by the adjudicating authority confirming the demand contained in the show cause notice and also directing the appellant to pay interest thereupon. The contentions of appellant were rejected by the adjudicating authority while passing the Order-in-Original. The appellant then preferred appeal against the aforesaid order.
 The two Members differed with each other on the issue as to whether it amounted to ‘manufacture’ or not and the matter was referred to the third Member. The third Member took the view that the process undertaken by the appellant amounted to ‘manufacture’. Against that judgment of the Tribunal appeal was preferred.

Appellant’s Contention:-The appellant, had taken the defence that the printing of the biri wrappers and thereafter cutting them to size does not amount to ‘manufacture’ and therefore no duty was payable. In addition, the contention of the appellant was that the printing biri wrappers cut to size were to be classified under Chapter Heading 4821.00 which attracts Nil rate of duty.

Respondent’s Contention:-Mr. Radhakrishnan referred the notice contained under Chapter 48 and particularly Note 11 thereof, which reads as under :
Except for the goods of heading No. 48.14 or 48.21, paper, paperboard, cellulose wadding and articles thereof, printed with motifs, characters or pictorial representations, which are not merely incidental to the primary use of the goods, fall in Chapter 49.

Heading No. Sub-heading No. Description of Goods Rate of duty
(1) (2) (3) (4)
48.01   Newsprint, in rolls or sheets  
  4801.10 - Odd sized and rejects 10%
  4801.90 - Other 10%

 
It was pointed out that except for the goods under Heading 48.14 or 48.21, paper, paper board, cellulose, Wadding and articles thereof printed with motifs, character or pictorial representations would fall under Chapter 49 when they are not merely incidental to the primary user of the goods. He was candid in accepting that in view thereof as far as printing of the biri wrappers is concerned, it would not fall under Chapter Heading 48.23, which was the case set up by the Revenue. According to him it would fall under Chapter 49. This position is accepted by Mr. Lakshmikumaran, learned counsel appearing for the appellant.
Entry 49.01, under which the goods fall, reads as under :
For the purposes of Chapter 49, ‘printed’ also means reproduced by means of a duplicating machine, produced under the control of a computer, embossed, photographed, photo-copied, thermocopied or typewritten.

Heading No. Subheading No. Description of Goods Rate of duty
(1) (2) (3) (4)
49.01   Printed books, newspapers, pictures and other products of the printing industry, manuscripts, typescripts and plans  
  4901.10 Transfers (decalcomanias) 20%
  4901.20 Maps and hydrographic or similar charts of all kinds including atlases, wall maps, topographical plans and globes, printed Nil
  4901.90 Other Nil

 
The only dispute is as to whether the goods in question will fall within the Entry 4901.10 or 4901.90. Whereas Mr. Radhakrishnan maintains that the goods would fall under Chapter Heading 4901.10, Mr. Lakshmikumaran argues otherwise.

Reasoning Of Judgement:-
Submissions of both were considered and Entry 4901.10 was referred which deals with ‘transfers (decalcomanias)’. The description of this entry is contained in HSN explanatory note which reads as under :
“Transfer (decalcomanias) consist of pictures, designs or lettering in single or multiple colours, lithographed or otherwise printed on absorbent, lightweight paper (or sometimes thin transparent sheeting of plastics), coated with a preparation, such as of starch and gum, to receive the imprint which is itself coated with an adhesive. This paper is often backed with a supporting paper of heavier quality. The designs are sometimes printed against a background of metal leaf.
When the printed paper is moistened and applied with slight pressure to a permanent surface (e.g. glass, pottery, wood, metal, stone or paper), the coating printed with the picture, etc. is transferred to the permanent surface.
This heading also covers vitrifiable transfers, i.e. transfers printed with vitrifiable preparations of Heading 32.07.
Transfers may be used for decoration or utility purposes, e.g. for decorating pottery or glass, or for marking various articles such as vehicles, machines, and instruments.
Transfers produced and supplied mainly for the amusement of children are also covered by this heading, as are also articles such as embroidery or hosier transfers which consist of papers on which designs are outlined in pigment which is transferred, usually to a textile surface, by pressure with a heated smoothing iron.”
On the face of it, it is apparent that the printing of biri wrappers would not and can never fit under the description ‘transfer decalcomanias’ inasmuch as in the present case on plain paper simple printing is done on the wrappers which are cut to size for the purpose of wrapping the biris and there is no use of sheet of plastics. In fact it is not printed on any absorbent, lightweight papers and there is no coating of starch and gum. The conclusion would be that the goods in question would fall under Item No. 4901.90 which attracts nil duty.
In view of the aforesaid classification, it is not even necessary to go into the question whether the process amounts to manufacture or not.

Decision:- The appeal is allowed.

Comment:- The crux of the case is that printing biri wrappers cut to size would fall under Item No.4901.90 which attracts Nil rate of duty. Therefore, no duty is payable on printing biri wrappers cut to size. As the classification of the product itself leads to nil rate of duty, the question whether process amounts to manufacture or not was not taken up for consideration.

Submitted By:- Somya Jain
 
 

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