Just a moment...
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
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 printing ink used for testing printing machines before delivery is an input eligible for Modvat credit under the Central Excise Rules, and whether the extended period and penalty could survive.
Analysis: The machines had to be tested after manufacture to ensure that they functioned properly before being accepted by customers. Goods required to be made marketable form part of manufacture, and materials used for that purpose can constitute inputs. Printing ink used in the testing process was therefore connected with making the finished machines marketable. In view of this conclusion, it was unnecessary to examine the limitation objection relating to the earlier period.
Conclusion: Printing ink used for testing the printing machines was held to be an input, and the demand and penalty could not be sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Materials used in testing finished goods, where such testing is necessary to make the goods marketable, qualify as inputs for Modvat purposes.