2026-VIL-1664-CESTAT-AHM-CE
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-1664-CESTAT-AHM-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Classification of Greenhouse - Whether classifiable as Plant growth chambers under CTH 8419 or as Prefabricated Buildings/Greenhouse in ready to assemble sets under CTH 9406 - Appellant, manufacturing customised greenhouses, cleared the goods under CTH 8419 8960 availing concessional duty under an exemption Notification - Revenue proposed classification under CTH 9406 0011 and demanded differential duty with interest and penalty, on the ground that fabricated structures were cleared from the factory with only assembly done at site - Whether the product is correctly classifiable under CTH 8419 or under CTH 9406 0011 - HELD - The appellant processes raw materials in the factory and clears the greenhouse in ready to assemble condition, with installation done at site owing to bulky size making transportation in assembled condition difficult - The product is specifically covered under CTH 9406 0011 as greenhouse in ready to assemble sets, to be preferred over the general description under CTH 8419 8960, a heading with the most specific description being preferred to one with a more general description - Following precedent that greenhouses in ready to assemble sets are classifiable under CTH 9406 0011, the appellant's claim for classification under CTH 8419 8960 is not legally correct, and the classification under CTH 9406 0011 held by the lower appellate authority is upheld. However, the appeal is allowed on limitation, and the duty demand, interest and penalty are set aside - Central Excise - Invocation of extended/amended period of limitation for issue of show cause notice - Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Show cause notice demanding differential duty for March to December 2014 was issued after the normal one-year period under the then-existing Section 11A(1)(a) had expired, relying on the substituted two-year period introduced by a later amendment - Whether the show cause notice invoking the amended limitation period is time barred - HELD - The demand would have already become time-barred under the one-year period applicable before the amendment enhancing it to two years - A statutory amendment is prospective unless specifically declared retrospective, and cannot revive a demand already time-barred before it came into force - The show cause notice is time barred, as the one-year period to issue it had already expired prior to the amendment - The appeal is allowed on limitation.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST & Customs updates: Sep'26
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

Security-Code
New Code?

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.

Security-Code
New Code?

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?