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>Tribunal allows appeal, labeling not manufacturing, demand time-barred.</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise, Noida Versus M/s Denso India Ltd. (Vice-Versa)</h3> Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise, Noida Versus M/s Denso India Ltd. (Vice-Versa) - TMI Issues:Appeal against impugned order - Whether activity of putting label and packing goods amounts to manufacture - Liability to pay duty - Validity of penalty imposed - Invocation of extended period of limitation.Analysis:The case involved an appeal against an impugned order where the assessee, engaged in manufacturing automobile parts and importing certain parts for sale to OEMs, was alleged by the Revenue to have engaged in manufacturing by putting labels on imported goods and packing them in plastic bins. The Revenue demanded duty, interest, and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 crore under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The assessee contended that the activity did not amount to manufacture as per Section 2(f)(iii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Alternatively, if considered as manufacture, they argued for Cenvat credit exceeding the duty liability, implying no mala fides. The Revenue argued that the packing activity constituted manufacture and invoked the extended period of limitation due to lack of departmental knowledge.Upon hearing the arguments, the Tribunal noted that if the activity was deemed as manufacture, the assessee could avail Cenvat credit exceeding the duty liability. Consequently, the Tribunal found no mala fides on the part of the assessee and held that the demand was time-barred as the show cause notice was issued beyond the limitation period. Citing a precedent in United Distributors vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, the Tribunal emphasized that a situation where Cenvat credit surpasses duty liability results in a revenue-neutral scenario, absolving the assessee from duty payment. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The assessee was granted any consequential relief, if applicable, in light of the judgment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
