The case before CESTAT involved the classification of ...

Goods not marketable=not liable for excise duty. Penalties unwarranted.

Case Laws Central Excise

June 24, 2024

The case before CESTAT involved the classification of intermediate goods - polyester/cotton rove twisted yarn and nylon/cotton rove twisted yarn. The key issue was whether these goods should be classified under Subheading No.5608.00 or 5607.90. CESTAT held that the goods were not marketable, citing precedents such as CIMMCO BIRLA LTD. v. Commissioner of Central Excise. Due to non-marketability, the goods were not considered excisable, leading to the rejection of the duty demand. The penalty imposed was deemed unjustified as there was no prior proposal for it. The decision set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeal.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The case before CESTAT involved the classification of ...

Goods not marketable=not liable for excise duty. Penalties unwarranted.

Case Laws Central Excise

June 24, 2024

You may also like:

Levy of Special Excise duty - Air Conditioners and parts - case of the department is that the goods which have been cleared by the appellant are having essential...

Warehoused goods - warehousing period expired - goods (wine) was rendered unfit for human consumption - relinquishment to the title to goods - The appellant is not...

This case deals with the applicability of Special Additional Excise Duty (SAED) levied u/s 147 of the Finance Act, 2002, and Additional Duty of Excise (AED) levied as...

Imposition of penalty equivalent to duty and interest u/s 114A of Customs Act - The expression used is 'or' which is disjunctive between duty or interest and further use...

Short payment of Central Excise Duty - The Appellate Tribunal concluded that central excise duty is leviable only on excisable goods manufactured or produced in India,...

Remission of duty - Rejection of petitioner’s application for remission of excise duty - export goods that got destroyed in fire at the Container Warehousing Corporation...

Reversal of Cenvat Credit - Scope of exemption notification - Notification exempting the basic excuse duty but not additional duty of excise - As per Rule 2(d),...

Duty demand - collection excess duty from customers on sale of import goods - duty under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act cannot be demanded on imported custom...

TP adjustment - Inclusion of excise duty on the operating revenue for two comparables - By including excise duty in the case of two comparables by the ld. TPO, the...

Levy of penalty u/r 26 - Personal penalty for abatement in evasion of duty - a plain reading of Rule 26 indicates that imposition of the penalty therein is not tied to a...

Refund of excess payment of duty - Sale of goods through depot - Valuation - The duty is payable in accordance with the Section 4 of Central Excise Valuation Rules ,...

100% EOU - de-bonding - refund of the excise duty previously paid - Admittedly, such duty was paid at the time of what is referred to de-bonding. However, this would not...

Refund claim - excise duty paid wrongly - The entry was made debiting the excise duty without actually collecting the excise duty - they have not paid the excise duty...

Recovery of wrongly utilized credit - utilization of Cenvat Credit availed on Basic Excise Duty (BED) for payment of EC and SHEC - Period between April 2013 and January...

Demand of differential Central Excise Duty with interest and penalty - inflating freight charges through their dummy transport unit - The Tribunal affirmed the...

Quick Updates: