TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether processing of textile amounts to manufacture so as to attract cess under Section 5A(1) of the Textile Committee Act, 1963; (ii) Whether the demand notice was invalid for want of prior opportunity.
Issue (i): Whether processing of textile amounts to manufacture so as to attract cess under Section 5A(1) of the Textile Committee Act, 1963.
Analysis: The controlling principle applied was that processing activities such as bleaching, dyeing, printing and finishing amount to manufacture. On that basis, the appellant's processing operations were treated as manufacture of textile for the purpose of cess liability. The contrary authority relied upon by the appellant was not accepted in view of the binding Supreme Court view.
Conclusion: The issue is decided against the assessee and it was held that the appellant was liable to pay cess under Section 5A(1) of the Textile Committee Act, 1963.
Issue (ii): Whether the demand notice was invalid for want of prior opportunity.
Analysis: The record showed that a show cause notice had already been issued before the demand notice. The challenge based on absence of opportunity was therefore not accepted.
Conclusion: The issue is decided against the assessee and the demand notice was held to be valid.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed in entirety, and the demand for cess was sustained as lawful.
Ratio Decidendi: Processing of textiles that results in bleaching, dyeing, printing or finishing constitutes manufacture for cess liability under Section 5A(1) of the Textile Committee Act, 1963, and a demand supported by a prior show cause notice is not invalid on the ground of lack of opportunity.
TaxTMI 
