2024-VIL-373-CESTAT-HYD-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Appellant is engaged in processing of tubes (stainless steel pipes) so that the pipes can be used for the purposes of oil drilling – Revenue of the view that processing of tubes amounts to ‘manufacture’ and the appellant is liable to discharged excise duty on these goods - whether the processes carried out by the appellant amounts to ‘manufacture’ or not – HELD – the present SCN has been issued by the Revenue due to change of opinion and/or interpretation after introduction of the 8 digit tariff. The only case of Revenue is that under the 8 digit tariff, due to processes undertaken by the appellant, the green pipe also falls under Chapter 73 and the processed pipe also falls under Chapter 73, although under different sub-headings and thus, it amounts to manufacture, due to change of the sub-heading - the issue is no longer res integra, under similar facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CCE vs SR Tissues Pvt Ltd held that mere mention of a product in a tariff heading does not necessarily implies that the said product was obtained by process of manufacture, just because raw material and finished product fall under two different sub-headings. It cannot be presumed that process of obtaining finished product from such raw material automatically constitute manufacture - Further, the SCN is bad as extended period of limitation is not available to Revenue under the admitted fact that all the facts were in the knowledge of the Revenue and the relied upon documents are nothing but the documents maintained by the appellant in the ordinary course of business – the impugned orders are set aside and appeals are allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page