2025-VIL-374-CESTAT-MUM-CE
  1. Home
  2. 2025-VIL-374-CESTAT-MUM-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Manufacture, Classification, Cross-examination - Appellants are engaged in the activity of drawing and re-drawing of copper strips/patta/patti and re-drawing of copper rods into copper wires - Department considered this activity as amounting to manufacture and issued show-cause notices demanding excise duty along with interest and penalties - Whether the process of drawing and re-drawing of copper flats into copper patta/patti amounts to 'manufacture' under the Central Excise Act, 1944 – HELD - The process of drawing or re-drawing of copper flats into copper patta/patti does not amount to 'manufacture' under the Central Excise Act, 1944 - the relevant provisions of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and the Chapter Notes, and found that the process of drawing or re-drawing is not mentioned as a process amounting to manufacture for the products under heading 7409, which covers copper plates, sheets and strips - the mere reduction in thickness or weight of the product does not automatically lead to the conclusion that a new product has been manufactured - the reliance placed by the Adjudicating Authority on the judgment in Laminated Packings (P) Ltd. case was misplaced as the facts were entirely different. Therefore, the process undertaken by the appellants does not amount to 'manufacture' for the purpose of levy of central excise duty - the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed - Whether the statements of the witnesses recorded by the Department can be relied upon as evidence without providing an opportunity for cross-examination to the appellants – HELD - the statements of the witnesses cannot be relied upon as evidence without providing the appellants an opportunity for cross-examination, as per the provisions of Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal relied on the judgments of the Delhi High Court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court, which have held that the procedure prescribed in the statute has to be followed for proving the truth of the statements. The Adjudicating Authority had not conducted the cross-examination of the witnesses, and therefore, their statements cannot be considered as admissible evidence.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Dr. G. Gokul Kishore

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

Credit Notes ITC Reversal in IMS…
By Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?