Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 the final products were entitled to exemption under Notification No. 208/83-C.E. when the inputs used were alleged to be specified goods, namely pieces roughly shaped, and not waste and scrap.
Analysis: The exemption depended upon use of the inputs specified in the notification and upon satisfaction of the tariff description. The materials purchased by the assessee were found to consist of trimmings, forgings, dismantled machines, broken engineering goods, punched steel containers and other broken articles. On the evidence, these were not shown to be pieces roughly shaped. The finding that the expression had been inserted later on the invoices was not effectively rebutted. For the period governed by the amended definition in Note 6 to Section XV, the materials answered the description of waste and scrap, which was outside the notification. For the earlier period also, the assessee did not establish that the materials were usable for purposes other than recovery of metal. The burden lay on the assessee to prove entitlement to the exemption.
Conclusion: The benefit of the notification was not available and the exemption claim failed.