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 Remands Case to Assess Duty on Plastic Sheets Before Printing; Clarifies Printing Isn't Manufacture.</h1> <h3>Caprihans India Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Nasik</h3> Caprihans India Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Nasik - TMI Issues: The judgment pertains to the demand of duty on clearance of 'printed plastic sheets' between September 1997 and July 1998. The main issue involves the classification of the finished goods under subheading 3920 39 as 'printed PVC sheets' instead of 'nil rate' of duty chargeable on 'products of printing industry' corresponding to subheading 4901 90 in the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.Summary:Issue 1: Classification of Finished GoodsThe appellant's appeal relates to the demand of duty on clearance of 'printed plastic sheets' and the classification of the finished goods under subheading 3920 39. The order of the original authority was confirmed based on an earlier order classifying the goods as 'printed PVC sheets' instead of 'nil rate' of duty chargeable on products of the printing industry. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the original authority to determine if duty liability had been discharged on plain 'plastic sheets' prior to printing.Issue 2: Interpretation of Previous Supreme Court OrderThe appellant referred to a previous Supreme Court order which held that the activity of 'printing' does not amount to 'manufacture'. The Tribunal emphasized that if duty liability had not been discharged on plain 'plastic sheets', such liability would arise even after further processing into a non-dutiable item. The Tribunal clarified that duty liability would only arise on plain 'plastic sheets' if it had not been discharged, restricting any recovery to unpaid duties on goods manufactured before printing.Conclusion:The Tribunal found that the facts were not straightforward, as the appellant claimed to manufacture plain 'plastic sheets' which were later printed. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the original authority to ascertain if duty liability had been discharged on plain 'plastic sheets' before printing. The decision highlighted the importance of determining duty liability on the initial manufactured goods before any further processing.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
