TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
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 Superior Kerosene Oil remained an excisable goods under the Central Excise Act, 1944 for the purposes of exclusion under section 125(1)(h) of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019. (ii) Whether inclusion of Superior Kerosene Oil in the Fourth Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944 was illegal or inconsistent with section 174 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the amended constitutional entry relating to excise duty.
Issue (i): Whether Superior Kerosene Oil remained an excisable goods under the Central Excise Act, 1944 for the purposes of exclusion under section 125(1)(h) of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019.
Analysis: The amended scheme of the Central Excise Act, 1944 treated goods specified in the Fourth Schedule as excisable goods. The charging structure under section 3, read with the definition in section 2(d) and the manufacture clause in section 2(f)(ii), showed that goods listed in the Fourth Schedule continued to fall within the excise regime even where no rate of duty was presently notified. The Additional Notes to the Fourth Schedule indicated only non-leviability of duty in the absence of a rate, not removal of excisable character. Since Superior Kerosene Oil was specifically included in the Fourth Schedule, the statutory bar in section 125(1)(h) applied.
Conclusion: The exclusion under section 125(1)(h) applied and the petitioner was not eligible to make a declaration under the scheme.
Issue (ii): Whether inclusion of Superior Kerosene Oil in the Fourth Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944 was illegal or inconsistent with section 174 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the amended constitutional entry relating to excise duty.
Analysis: The constitutional amendment under Article 246-A and the amended Entry 84 did not eliminate the Central Excise Act, 1944 for goods still falling within the permitted excise field. Section 174 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 preserved the repealed enactments to the extent of goods covered by the amended Entry 84 of List I. The continuation of Superior Kerosene Oil in the Fourth Schedule was therefore not contrary to the repeal and saving provision, and the challenge to its inclusion had no merit.
Conclusion: The challenge to the inclusion of Superior Kerosene Oil in the Fourth Schedule failed.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition was held to be devoid of merit, and the rejection of the declaration under the legacy dispute resolution scheme was upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: Goods specifically retained in the Fourth Schedule of the Central Excise Act, 1944 continue to be excisable goods for the purpose of statutory exclusions under the legacy dispute resolution scheme, and their inclusion is not invalid merely because no duty rate is presently leviable or because GST has been introduced for other taxable events.
TaxTMI 
