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 - 2005 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2005 (9) TMI 173 - AT - Central Excise


Issues Involved:
1. Classification of the product "Scented Tobacco" under the Central Excise Tariff.
2. Eligibility for Small Scale Industry (SSI) exemption.
3. Clubbing of clearances of different units.
4. Clandestine manufacture and sale without registration.
5. Imposition of duty demands and penalties.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of the Product "Scented Tobacco":
The core issue was whether "Scented Tobacco" should be classified under Heading 2404.40 as "chewing tobacco and preparation containing chewing tobacco." The Revenue supported this classification, while the Appellant contested it. The tribunal noted that the notices issued did not clearly define "preparation" or explain how the product qualified as "chewing tobacco." The tribunal found that the product was not a compound like "Kimoun" as discussed in the Dharampal Satyapal case, which involved a mixture of aqueous tobacco solution and perfumes. The tribunal concluded that the product, as it left the premises, was not "chewing tobacco" but rather raw tobacco treated with quimam and perfumes, which did not render it ready for chewing.

2. Eligibility for SSI Exemption:
Appeals were filed by M/s. Yogesh Associates and M/s. J.M. Enterprises, contesting the denial of SSI benefits. The tribunal found that since the product was classified under Heading 2401.10, which has a nil tariff rate, the clearances could not be clubbed for SSI turnover determination. The tribunal also noted that the SSI notification exempts goods with a nil tariff rate from being counted towards SSI turnover.

3. Clubbing of Clearances:
The tribunal examined whether the clearances of different units under the J.M. Joshi Group could be clubbed. The tribunal found that the classification of the product under 2401.10 at a nil tariff rate meant that there was no basis for clubbing the clearances of different units to deny the SSI benefit.

4. Clandestine Manufacture and Sale without Registration:
The tribunal addressed the issue of clandestine manufacture and sale without registration. It found that since the product was classified under 2401.10 with a nil tariff rate, there was no requirement for registration under the Central Excise Act and Rules. Consequently, the charges of clandestine removal and the imposition of penalties could not be upheld.

5. Imposition of Duty Demands and Penalties:
The tribunal concluded that the classification of the product under 2404.40 was incorrect and that the correct classification was under 2401.10 with a nil tariff rate. As a result, there was no basis for duty demands or penalties. The tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeals.

Conclusion:
The tribunal found that the product "Scented Tobacco" should be classified under Heading 2401.10 with a nil tariff rate, rather than 2404.40. This classification meant that the product was not subject to excise duty, and the SSI exemption could not be denied. The tribunal also found no grounds for clubbing clearances or imposing penalties for clandestine manufacture and sale. The appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates