https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759401 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that appellant manufacturing PSF using 90% PET bottle scrap and 10% popcorn waste was entitled to nil/concessional duty benefits under relevant notifications. The court ruled that absence of words "only," "exclusively," or "entirely" in notifications meant benefit could not be denied for mixed raw materials. Popcorn waste qualified as plastic waste for notification purposes, supporting recycling objectives. Extended limitation period under section 11A(4) was wrongly invoked as no deliberate suppression of facts existed - appellant had disclosed popcorn usage in returns and investigations. Penalty on Director was also set aside for lack of evidence regarding knowledge of confiscation liability. Appeals allowed, impugned order set aside. en-us Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Sep 2024 14:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759401 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that appellant manufacturing PSF using 90% PET bottle scrap and 10% popcorn waste was entitled to nil/concessional duty benefits under relevant notifications. The court ruled that absence of words "only," "exclusively," or "entirely" in notifications meant benefit could not be denied for mixed raw materials. Popcorn waste qualified as plastic waste for notification purposes, supporting recycling objectives. Extended limitation period under section 11A(4) was wrongly invoked as no deliberate suppression of facts existed - appellant had disclosed popcorn usage in returns and investigations. Penalty on Director was also set aside for lack of evidence regarding knowledge of confiscation liability. Appeals allowed, impugned order set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759401