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 benefit of Notification No. 75/84-C.E. was available to specified inputs used in the manufacture of thinners, and whether thinners fell within the expression "allied materials" in the notification.
Analysis: The notification granted concessional duty to specified goods when used as solvent, diluent or thinner for the manufacture of paints, varnishes, lacquers and allied materials. The Court read the expression "allied materials" broadly and held that thinners are essential materials used with paints, varnishes and lacquers, being mixtures of solvents used to reduce viscosity and facilitate application. It also relied on the earlier Tribunal view that the earlier and later exemption notifications were pari materia, and that end-use verification should not defeat the exemption where the goods were cleared under the prescribed Chapter X procedure and CT 2 certificates had been issued.
Conclusion: The exemption was held to apply to the inputs used for manufacturing thinners, and the demand and penalty were unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an exemption notification covers inputs intended for use as solvent, diluent or thinner for the manufacture of paints, varnishes, lacquers and allied materials, the manufacture of thinners is covered if thinners are treated as allied materials within the scope of the notification.