2026-VIL-612-CESTAT-HYD-CE
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-612-CESTAT-HYD-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Classification of granite products under Central Excise Tariff Heading (CETH) - The appellant, a 100% EOU engaged in manufacturing of granite slabs, blocks and other articles, contested the classification of its products under CETH 6802 instead of CETH 2516 as claimed by it – HELD - If the goods were merely roughly trimmed or cut without any further polishing or sizing, they may fall under CETH 2516, otherwise they would be classifiable under CETH 6802. The classification has a bearing on the levy of Central Excise duty on the clearances made by the appellant to the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) as well as to another EOU - The Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to re-determine the classification of the appellant's granite products based on the evidence submitted by the appellant regarding the nature and extent of processing carried out on the granite blocks quarried from the mines – The appeal is allowed by remand - Clearance of goods from EOU to another EOU - The appellant had cleared certain quantities of goods from its EOU to another EOU without obtaining prior approval from the Development Commissioner as required. This was a procedural breach and the appellant had later obtained post-facto approval from the Development Commissioner - Mere procedural lapses cannot lead to invocation of the B-17 bond, unless there is any allegation that the duty-free imported goods were not used in the manufacture of the goods in the EOU. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to verify the accountal of the entire quantity cleared by the appellant to the other EOU - Denial of benefit under Notification Nos. 52/2003-Cus and 22/2003-CE - The department denied the benefit of exemption on inputs procured by the appellant under the above notifications, on the ground of procedural lapses in clearing goods from EOU to DTA and another EOU – HELD - There was no allegation that the duty-free imported goods were not used in the manufacture of goods in the EOU. The adjudicating authority is directed to verify if the appellant had fulfilled all the conditions, including achievement of Net Foreign Exchange (NFE), under the said notifications, except for the procedural lapse in clearance to another EOU. Subject to this satisfaction, the benefit of the notifications cannot be denied to the appellant.
Download File
show more Judgements  

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Kasi Viswanathan V

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

Changes in GST, IT & Cuss w.e.f. 1 Apr
By CA 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?