Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2013 (12) TMI 685 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest, and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act.
2. Classification of goods under Chapter Heading 4820 or Chapter 49 of the Tariff.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The applicant sought waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs.28,96,923, along with interest and penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) had directed the applicant to deposit 50% of the duty for the appeal hearing, but the applicant failed to comply, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The Tribunal considered the applicant's contention and directed them to deposit an amount equal to 50% of the confirmed duty within eight weeks. Upon compliance, the pre-deposit of the remaining dues was waived for the appeal hearing scheduled for a specific date.

Issue 2: The core issue revolved around the classification of the products in question. The Revenue argued that the goods, including LIC forms, bank statement forms, cheques, and stationery, fell under Chapter Heading 4820 of the Tariff, covering registers, account books, and business forms. On the other hand, the applicants claimed that the goods should be classified under Chapter 49 of the Tariff, which pertains to printed books, brochures, and leaflets. The Tribunal examined the nature of the products and concluded that they did not qualify as printed books, brochures, or leaflets. Therefore, the applicants were directed to deposit 50% of the confirmed duty amount, considering the earlier stay order and the classification dispute. The Tribunal emphasized that the applicants had not substantiated a case for a complete waiver of duty, leading to the specified directive for deposit and compliance within a stipulated timeframe.

This judgment highlights the significance of proper classification under the Tariff and the procedural requirements for seeking waiver of duty pre-deposit in excise matters. The Tribunal's decision underscores the need for a clear demonstration of classification principles and compliance with deposit conditions for the appeal process to proceed effectively.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates