https://www.taxtmi.com/css/info/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.css?v=1746094055Tax Updates - Daily Update
https://www.taxtmi.com
Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax ServicesTax Management India. Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved.One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes2025 (3) TMI 1182 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767796
https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767796Classification of goods namely Student Almanac and teacher planner, Diaries, Workbook, Calendars, Note-Pads and Scrap books - to be classified under Chapter 49 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or under Chapter 48 as Articles of Paper or of Paper Board and attract duty @ 12.5% ad valorem? - exemption from waste and scrap under N/N. 27/2011-CE dated 24.03.2011 - invocation of extended period of limitation - Penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules of the Central Excise Rules on Director of the assessee. Classification of Student Almanac and teacher planner - HELD THAT:- The Student Almanac is the same as a diary except that it is customized to meet the requirements of students of the particular school. Therefore, the information relevant to that school is printed in it. The submission of the learned counsel that since Student Almanac is used only by students of a particular school, it becomes a product of printing industry cannot be accepted. Undisputedly 90% of the space in the Student Almanac is left blank for students to write. Providing additional information relevant to the school does not make it a product of printing industry. The teacher planner, likewise is to help to make notes and, therefore, stand on the same footing - the submission of the assessee deserves to be rejected. Waste and scrap - HELD THAT:- The only submission of the assessee with respect to waste and scrap is that since Student Almanac and teacher planner were exempted from payment of duty, the scrap generated also should be exempted by virtue of N/N. 27/2011-CE. The submission of the Revenue is that since Student Almanac and teacher planner and other products, such as, diaries, note pads were exigible to duty, the assessee was not entitled to exemption from waste and scrap. For the reasons stated above while dealing with classification of Student Almanac and teacher planner, the submission of the learned authorized representative deserves to be accepted and the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of exemption on waste and scrap. Extended period of limitation - penalty - HELD THAT:- There was no evidence of intention to evade payment of duty and suppression of facts because it was possible for the assessee to have entertained the belief that the Student Almanac and teacher planner were not exigible to duty and, therefore, to have NOT declared them in their excise returns - the question of limitation found in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the impugned order needs to be upheld in so far as this limitation is concerned. Consequently, the penalty under section 11AC was also correctly set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. Penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules of the Central Excise Rules on Director of the assessee - HELD THAT:- In this case there is no confiscation of the goods nor is there any allegation that any Cenvat credit has been wrongly taken - the Commissioner (Appeals) was correct in setting aside the penalty on Shri Kishore Mittal under Rule 26 of the Rules. Conclusion - i) Student Almanac and Teacher Planner are classifiable under Chapter 48 due to their primary purpose for writing, similar to diaries. ii) The denial of exemption for waste and scrap, as dutiable goods are manufactured alongside exempted goods upheld. iii) There are no evidence of intent to evade duty or suppress facts, supporting the decision to set aside the demand for the extended period. iv) The decision to set aside the penalty on the Director upheld, as the conditions for imposing a penalty under Rule 26 were not met. Appeal dismissed.Case-LawsCentral ExciseMon, 24 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530