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>Laminated paper for wrapping photocopying paper classified under heading 48239019, qualifies for area-based exemption benefits</h1> <h3>M/s Well-Tech Packaging Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-II</h3> M/s Well-Tech Packaging Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-II - TMI Issues Involved:1. Classification of goods manufactured by Appellant 1.2. Eligibility for exemption under Notification No 50/2003-CE.3. Appropriateness of demand for duty, interest, and penalties.Summary:Issue 1: Classification of GoodsThe core issue is the correct classification of goods manufactured by Appellant 1. The appellant initially classified their laminated paper under heading 48114900, which falls in the negative list of Notification No 50/2003-CE. The appellant later claimed that their product should be classified under heading 4823, which does not fall within the negative list. The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's rulings in Dunlop India Ltd and Elson Machines Pvt Ltd, emphasizing that there is no estoppel in law against a party in a taxation matter, allowing the appellant to change the classification. The Tribunal concluded that the laminated paper used for wrapping photocopy paper should be classified under heading 48239013, which specifically covers packing and wrapping paper.Issue 2: Eligibility for ExemptionThe Tribunal examined whether the goods classified under heading 48239013 are eligible for exemption under Notification No 50/2003-CE. Since heading 4823 is not in the negative list of the specified goods as per the area-based exemption notification, the Tribunal held that the goods are correctly classifiable under heading 48239013 and thus eligible for the exemption.Issue 3: Demand for Duty, Interest, and PenaltiesGiven the correct classification and eligibility for exemption, the Tribunal found no merit in the demand for duty and interest. Consequently, the penalties imposed on both appellants were also set aside. The Tribunal referenced several Supreme Court decisions, including Indian Tools Manufacturers and Kumudam Publications (P) Ltd, to support its conclusions.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed both appeals, setting aside the demand for duty, interest, and penalties, and confirmed the eligibility for exemption under Notification No 50/2003-CE for the goods classified under heading 48239013.
TaxTMI 