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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether excise duty was chargeable on stock of molasses manufactured before the introduction of Tariff Item No. 15CC and whether the earlier exemption notification continued to apply.
Analysis: Excise duty is a duty on manufacture or production, but under the Central Excise Rules the liability is linked to the time of removal from the factory or approved place of storage, not to the date of manufacture. Rule 9, Rule 9-A and Rule 49 indicate that duty becomes payable at the stage of clearance, and the rate in force on the date of removal governs the levy. The earlier exemption notification applied when molasses was treated under the residuary item, but once molasses was brought under a specific tariff item, it ceased to fall within that notification. The absence of retrospective language in the Finance Act did not prevent levy on the stock when removed after the new tariff entry came into force.
Conclusion: The stock of molasses was validly subjected to excise duty, and the exemption under the earlier notification was unavailable.
Final Conclusion: The challenge to the duty demand failed, and the petitions were rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Excise duty may be lawfully levied at the stage of removal, and once goods are brought under a specific tariff item, an earlier exemption confined to a different classification does not continue to apply to stock cleared thereafter.