Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Missing seized records must be considered while testing ITC claim; duplicate GST demands ordered corrected: Delhi High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be rejected without addressing taxpayer’s grounds: Allahabad High Court. *  Surplus IGST credit can offset CGST, SGST shortfall: GSTAT. *  GST refund can’t be denied when cancelled airfares are returned with tax: GSTAT. *  3 Hearing notices issued within 2 minutes: Gujarat High Court flags portal flaw, seeks report. *  GSTR-9, GSTR-9C filing for FY 2025-26 enabled; pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B must be filed first. *  Dupattas are exempt fabrics, can’t be taxed as fibres at 4%: Madras High Court. *  Full transitional credit allowed on capital goods received after GST rollout: GSTAT denies Rs. 6.99 lakh export duty credit. *  GST return mismatch alone can’t justify fraud proceedings: GSTAT orders fresh adjudication under section 73. *  Supplier found non-existent later can’t alone justify input tax credit denial: GSTAT. *  GST interest stops once tax reaches government account, can’t run until return filing: GSTAT. *  Cancelled flat booking- GST refund can’t be denied without excluding COVID period from limitation: GSTAT. *  India notifies rules of origin for India–New Zealand FTA. *  Incomplete E-bike kits classifiable as complete vehicles, but not eligible for CKD duty concession: CESTAT. *  Same GST rate on main input and output can’t by itself bar inverted duty refund: GSTAT. *  Unjust enrichment doesn’t apply to customs refunds from assessments finalised before July 13, 2006: Gujarat High Court. *  CENVAT credit can’t be denied solely because plant And machinery are embedded in earth: Karnataka High Court. *  DFIA exports ineligible for RoDTEP benefits; customs directs repayment with applicable interest. *  Second E-Way bill alone doesn’t prove another supply: GSTAT. *  Bail denied in Rs. 1.19 crore fake GST refund case over risk of accused absconding again: Punjab and Haryana High Court. *  GST registration can be restored after revocation deadline if outstanding dues are paid: Gauhati High Court. *  Multiple GST proceedings over same suppliers: Calcutta High Court directs dept. to share findings for adjudication. *  E-Governance portal services not OIDAR, fixed deposit interest not taxable: CESTAT. *  Rs. 500 Stamp duty required on authority letters for CAs, CMA and GST practitioners in Pune GST division.  *  Rs. 1.10 crore GST refund must be paid in cash after business closure: Allahabad High Court. *  Godown rent attracts 18% GST even when used exclusively for exempt agricultural warehousing: AAR. *  GST portal launches "Multi-State Registration" facility: one master TRN for registration applications across multiple States/UTs. *  RoDTEP scheme extended till 31st December, 2026.  *  Mere disagreement with order can’t override Rs. 20 lakh appeal limit: GSTAT. *  Customs interest can’t be backdated before confiscation liability is determined; nearly 8 year period excluded: Delhi High Court.
Subject News *  GST summons: anticipatory bail maintainable without arrest order, but relief denied in evasion case: Allahabad High Court. *  GST Appeal can’t be decided without hearing taxpayer’s objections to fresh evidence: Allahabad High Court. *  GST ITC can’t be reversed merely because supplier grants discount without reducing tax liability: GSTAT. *  Mere quoting of GST provision is not a valid charge: GSTAT quashes ITC denial. *  Personal hearing mandatory before adverse GST order, even without taxpayer’s request: Rajasthan High Court. *  Parallel bail pleas without full disclosure amount to abuse of process Rs. 43.08 crore GST case sent for fresh hearing: Supreme Court. *  GST refund based on unchallenged advance ruling can’t be recovered using later circular: GSTAT. *  Payment of GST alone doesn’t end interest and penalty liability when tax and interest remain unpaid beyond 30 days of notice: GSTAT. *  GST demand over builders’ 80% procurement rule requires reasoned adjudication: GSTAT. *  Eligible ITC doesn’t automatically entitle taxpayers to compensation cess refund on domestic sales: GSTAT. *  GST confiscation order passed before reply deadline invalid: GSTAT. *  GST interest can’t be retained after tax refund on delayed export receipts: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be dismissed over pre-deposit shortfall without opportunity To respond: Bombay High Court. *  DGGI SCN can’t be challenged before reply and adjudication:Chhattisgarh High Court. *  GST input tax credit can’t be denied solely due to supplier’s retrospective registration cancellation: GSTAT. *  GST notice must explain fraud allegations; merely repeating section 74 Is not enough:  Himachal Pradesh High Court. *  Audit detection alone can’t justify GST fraud penalty; specific suppression must be proved: GSTAT. *  GST order uploaded only under ‘Additional Notices’ tab without separate intimation set aside: Calcutta High Court. *  Service Tax appeal can’t be rejected for missing pre-deposit proof when payment is already recorded: CESTAT. *  SGST dept. can’t hear appeal against CGST order: Calcutta High Court. *  Mere dispatch of tax order can’t prove service or make appeal time-barred: CESTAT. *  Dealer incentives can’t be taxed merely on ledger entries: CESTAT. *  DGFT orders quashed for failure to supply DRI letter relied upon in SCN: Bombay High Court. *  GST penalty u/s 122(1A) can’t apply to Pre-2021 transactions; unregistered beneficiaries also covered: Delhi High Court. *  Expired E-way bill caused by wrong PIN code can’t justify GST penalty without intent to evade tax: GSTAT. *  Used railway rails can’t be taxed as track material without proof they are fit for reuse: CESTAT. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand on different issue: Delhi High Court. *  ITC dispute involves no question of law: GSTAT directs appeal to Vice-President. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand On different issue: Delhi High Court. *  No E-way bill required for interstate goods movement in november 2017: GSTAT quashes detention and penalty.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1375

Clearance of packing material of inputs & packing material procured by assessee - leviable to duty

Case: INDORAMA SYNTHETICS (I) LTD. versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., NAGPUR
 
Citation: 2011 (271) E.L.T. 551 (Tri. - Mumbai)
 
Issue:- Clearance of packing material of inputs procured as waste - No duty payable.
 
Clearance of packing material procured by assessee bit becoming waste – duty payable.
 
Brief Facts:- The appellants are manufacturer of yarn. During the course of manufacture, they used inputs in corrugated boxes/plastic bags. After using the inputs, they have cleared these corrugated boxes/plastic bags (the packing materials of inputs) as scrap without payment of duty. The appellants were also procuring paper tube/bobbins, craft paper, plain paper etc. on payment of duty for proper packing of the yarn for transferring to other division for further processing. During the course of processing, these pa­per tubes/bobbins etc. were used for proper handling of the goods, which were ultimately became scrap. These scraps have also been cleared by them without payment of duty. They have cleared all the waste generated dur­ing the course of their manufacturing activity, without payment of duty.
 
Revenue was of the view that the appellants was required to pay duty on such waste and scrap. Therefore, two show-cause notices were issued.
 
In appeal No. E/1010/09, the Adjudicating Authority dropped the demand against which the Revenue filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who set aside the Adjudication order and confirmed the demand as per show-cause notice.
 
Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), appellant is before the Tribunal.
 
In appeal No. E/106/10, the Adjudicating Authority dropped the demand against which the Revenue filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who set aside the adjudication order and confirmed the demand as per show-cause notice. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee is before filed this appeal.
 
In appeal No. E/106/10, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand but on appeal by the assessee before the Commissioner (Appeals), the adjudication order was set aside. Therefore, Revenue is in appeal in that matter before this Tribunal.
 
Appellant’s Contention:- Appellant-assessee submitted that they had cleared the waste which has arisen from the packing material of the inputs procured by them and the same is covered by the Board Circular No. 721 /37/2003-C.X., dated 6-6-2003. Appellant also relied on the deci­sion of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. West Coast Industrial Gases Ltd. [2003 (155) E.L.T. 11 (S.C.)] and in their own case reported in 2009-TIOL-1913-CESTAT-MUM, Commissioner of Central Excise v. Wipro Ltd. [2002 (150) E.L.T. 249 (T)] which has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2003 (154) E.L.T. A175 (S.C.). Appellant also relied on the decision of this Tribunal in their own case vide Order No. A/1534 /WZB/ 2005/C-II, dated 6-6-2005 [2005 (190) E.L.T. 431 (Tri.)].
 
Respondent’s Contention:- Revenue submitted that in this case, the assessee was also pro­curing packing materials such as paper tubes/bobbins, corrugated paper/boxes and craft paper on payment of duty and they have sold the scrap arisen of these paper tubes/bobbins, corrugated paper/boxes and craft paper etc. Therefore, the assessee is required to pay Central Excise duty on clearance of waste arising out of these materials procured by the assessee on payment of duty. They placed reliance on Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-If v. Bliil­zvara Spinners Ltd. [2005 (182) E.L.T. 371 (Tri.-Del.)].
 
Reasoning of Judgment:- The Tribunal found that in this case the dispute has arisen on account of clearances of waste of paper, cor­rugated boxes, plastic bags, paper tubes, craft paper/boxes which have been cleared by the assessee without payment of duty.
 
It was noted that the appellant has contended that all these waste has arisen on procurement of the raw materials and as per Board's Circular dated 6-6-2003, the assessee is not required to pay the duty on such waste and scrap. The Tribunal also agrees with the contention of the appellant that no duty is payable on waste of packing materials of inputs. But, if any packing material has been pur­chased by the assessee for packing of intermediate/final goods and the said packing material has become waste, the said scrap has been cleared without payment of duty by them; then assessee is liable to pay duty on such waste.
 
From the facts of this case, it is not coming out that how much waste has been arisen on account of packing materials of raw materials i.e. inputs and how much packing materials have been procured by the assessee on payment of duty. Therefore, this requires examination at the end of the Adjudicating Authority.
 
The matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to re-quantify the demand on waste and scrap of packing materials procured by the assessee on payment of duty.
 
Decision:- Matter remanded back.
 
Comment: - This is very interesting decision wherein the tribunal has held that the waste of packing material purchased for packing finished goods is chargeable to duty. But no duty is payable on waste of packing material of inputs as per Apex Court decision in West Coast cite supra. But if both the packing material is of same type then the assessee has to maintain the separate inventory for both types of waste. In such a situation, the assessee prefer to pay the duty because the cost of maintaining separate inventory will be more than the actual benefit. 

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