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 the appellant was entitled to deemed credit under Notification No. 29/96 dated 3-9-96 in respect of inputs used in the manufacture of grey fabric, and whether the denial of the benefit on the ground that the final product was not specifically mentioned could be sustained.
Analysis: The notification, read with the corrigendum and the Board's Circular No. 243/77/96 dated 3-9-96, showed that Heading 5801 was included in the list of final products and that deemed credit for independent processors was intended to cover duty paid on inputs such as fibres, yarns, dyes, chemicals, consumables and packaging materials. The exclusion was not justified merely because a particular sub-heading was not separately named when the broader heading was covered. The claim for refund remained subject to verification on unjust enrichment.
Conclusion: The denial of deemed credit was unsustainable and the appellant was held entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 29/96, with refund subject to verification on unjust enrichment.
Final Conclusion: The appeals were allowed and the impugned order denying the exemption benefit and deemed credit was set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an exemption or deemed credit notification expressly covers the relevant tariff heading, the benefit cannot be denied on the narrow ground that a particular sub-heading is not separately specified, if the broader heading clearly encompasses the final product.