9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 1030 - SC - Central ExciseClandestine removal of goods - Non accounting of goods in RG-1 register - Held that - Factual aspects were considered by the CESTAT in detail and more, particularly, the manner in which the matter was dealt with by, none else, but the officers of the Revenue themselves, a finding of facts was arrived at to the effect that the said yarn was treated as waste. - Finding does not suffer from any infirmity. We, thus, confirm the order passed by the CESTAT - Decided against Revenue.
Issues:
Dispute regarding treatment of yarn bobbins weighing 1 kg or less as waste and non-marketable, resulting in alleged short payment of Central Excise Duty. Analysis: The respondent-assessee, engaged in manufacturing polyester filament yarn, faced a dispute regarding the treatment of partially wound bobbins weighing 1 kg or less as waste. The Revenue alleged that the assessee had not accounted for the production of such yarn in the RG-1 register, resulting in short payment of Central Excise Duty amounting to Rs. 1,06,07,775. The assessee contended that the yarn of bobbins weighing 1 kg or less was considered waste and not marketable, hence not attracting any excise duty. The Collector did not accept this explanation, leading to a Show Cause Notice and subsequent appeal to the CEGAT, which set aside the Collector's order. Upon appeal to the Supreme Court, the case was remanded back to the CEGAT for further consideration as some aspects were not adequately discussed. The CEGAT, upon reevaluation, reached the same conclusion, emphasizing the treatment of the yarn as waste based on the evidence provided by the assessee and the excise authorities. The CESTAT's detailed reasoning in the impugned order supported the conclusion that the yarn bobbins weighing 1 kg or less were indeed treated as waste and not sold as yarn, thus not evading duty. The Court noted the thorough consideration of factual aspects by the CESTAT, especially the treatment of the yarn as waste by the Revenue officers themselves. Based on this finding of fact, the Court confirmed the CESTAT's order, dismissing the appeal. The detailed analysis and evidence presented by both parties led to the conclusion that the yarn in question was appropriately categorized as waste, justifying the non-payment of excise duty on bobbins weighing 1 kg or less.
|
