TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court allows manufacturer to use scheme benefits to pay duty, sets aside denial order. Manufacturers entitled to adjust money credit for duty.</h1> <h3>KUSUM PRODUCTS LTD. & ANR. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE KOL – IV.</h3> KUSUM PRODUCTS LTD. & ANR. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE KOL – IV. - TMI Issues: Challenge to show-cause notice and order regarding utilization of accumulated money credit by vanaspati manufacturers under different schemes.Analysis:The petitioner challenged a show-cause notice and an order refusing to accept the utilization of accumulated money credit by the petitioner, related to a scheme introduced by the Union of India for vanaspati manufacturers. The scheme allowed manufacturers to set off duty paid for purchase of minor oils against duty payable on vanaspati manufacture. The scheme was discontinued and later reintroduced in a different version. The petitioner sought to use benefits accumulated under the first scheme towards payment under the second scheme. The Court had previously considered a similar issue in a writ petition (WP No. 137 of 2000 - Rasoi Limited & Another vs. Union of India & Others), where it was decided in favor of vanaspati manufacturers. The appeal and special leave petition from the aforementioned judgment were also dismissed.The respondents argued that the issues raised in the present writ petition were covered by the judgment in Rasoi Limited case. The Court in Rasoi Limited held that vanaspati manufacturers were entitled to adjust money credit accrued earlier towards duty payable for a subsequent period. The Court found the petitioner in the current case to be similarly situated as the petitioner in the Rasoi Limited case. Consequently, the impugned order dated September 13, 2005, which denied the petitioner's claim to utilize accumulated benefits under the first scheme to pay duty, was set aside as it did not consider the precedent set by the Rasoi Limited case.In conclusion, the Court disposed of the writ petition, stating that the petitioner, as a vanaspati manufacturer, was entitled to utilize the accumulated benefits under the first scheme to pay duty under the subsequent scheme, in line with the judgment in Rasoi Limited case. No costs were awarded in the matter.
TaxTMI 