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>CEGAT Tribunal Upholds Soap Wrapper Classification under 4823.90, Rejects Excess Duty Credit Claim</h1> <h3>COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAJKOT Versus HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.</h3> The appeals before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai involved the classification of printed wrappers for soap manufacturing under sub-headings 4823.90 ... Modvat Issues: Classification of printed wrappers for soap manufacturing under sub-headings 4823.90 and 4823.19, Modvat credit availment, Competence of officers at recipient factory to alter classification.Summary:The 11 appeals before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai shared common facts and stemmed from the same impugned order regarding the classification of printed wrappers used in soap manufacturing. The wrappers were considered to fall under sub-heading 4823.90, and the assessees claimed credit for the duty paid. However, show cause notices later alleged that the duty credit was taken in excess, amounting to Rs. 12,97,833.63, due to a restriction under notification 177/86 for sub-heading 4823.19. The Assistant Commissioner upheld the classification under 4823.19, leading to appeals by the assessees, which were allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on jurisdictional classification by suppliers' factory officers.In the appeals, arguments were made referencing previous judgments, including the case of Pearl Soap Co. Ltd. v. CCE, which supported the classification under 4823.90 for the wrappers. The Tribunal considered the classification evident from the documents clearing the consignments and upheld the assessees' classification approved by departmental officers at the factory of origin. Citing precedents like Tata Oil Mills Co. Ltd. v. CCE and others, it was emphasized that officers at the recipient factory lacked the authority to alter the approved classification to the detriment of the assessees.The Tribunal found the Commissioner's observations on alternate classification irrelevant since he did not permit its application. After reviewing the cited judgments and the facts of the impugned order, the Tribunal concluded that the order was legally sound and dismissed the appeals, affirming the correctness of the classification under sub-heading 4823.90 for the printed wrappers used in soap manufacturing.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
