9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1444 - AT - Central ExciseSSI Exemption - branded goods of other person cleared on payment of duty - Held that - in the case of CCE, Chennai Vs. Nebulae Health Care Ltd. 2015 (11) TMI 95 - SUPREME COURT , the Hon ble Apex Court has held that if the branded goods have been manufactured at on behalf of the principle and same has been cleared on payment of duty, in that circumstances, for their own clearances, assessee is entitle for payment of exemption Notification - benefit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Appeal against denial of SSI Exemption benefit under Notification No. 8/2003-CE. Analysis: The appellant appealed against an order denying the benefit of SSI Exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE. The case involved the clearance of goods availing exemption but also clearing branded goods for others on payment of duty. The appellant utilized Cenvat Credit against inputs used in manufacturing branded goods. The total value of goods cleared during the period was significant. The Tribunal held that the appellant was not entitled to the SSI exemption. The appellant cited a Supreme Court case where it was held that if branded goods were manufactured on behalf of a principal and cleared on duty payment, the assessee was entitled to exemption for their own clearances. The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court case of CCE, Chennai Vs. Nebulae Health Care Ltd. and a Tribunal case of League Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CCE, Rohtak. The Tribunal emphasized the scheme of the Notifications, stating that clearances bearing brand names of third parties are not eligible for exemption. However, if branded goods are manufactured by an SSI Unit on a job work basis for third parties, they are not entitled to exemption, and excise duty must be paid. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of the exemption Notification No. 8/2003-CE. In conclusion, the impugned order denying the SSI exemption benefit was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief. The decision was dictated and pronounced in the open court.
|
