Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2018 (3) TMI 1054

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ETA, 1985. The appellant had intimated the Dept. on 30.10.2015 about non production of finished good using FFS machine during the month of November 2015, under the Chewing Tobacco and unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty), Rules 2010. They have intimated the Dept. about the commencement of the production of 5 gm pouches bearing MRP Rs. 3/- of unmanufactured Tobacco on FFS packing machine with effect from 1.12.2015. Later they have intimated the Dept. on 4.12.2015 their intention to stop production of goods from 10.12.2015. Consequently, their FFS packing machine was sealed by the jurisdictional Superintendent in the mid-night of 9/10.12.2015. Thus, the machine was used only for 9 days. On th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation and following the procedure laid down under Rule 10 of the Chewing Tobacco and unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty). The Ld Commissioner (Appeals) erred in rejecting the refund claim observing that the appellant had not intimated the fact of production of un-manufactured Tobacco utilizing their FFS packaging machine of pouches of 8 gms/10 gms bearing the MRP of Rs. 5/-, therefore, they are not eligible to the abatement claim for the closure of the factory during the said period. 4. The Ld AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Ld Commissioner (Appeals). 5. I find the undisputed facts are that the appellant during the period 1.12.2015 to 31.12.2015 initially paid duty of R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssistant Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, with a copy to the Superintendent of Central Excise, at least three working days prior to the commencement of said period, who on receipt of such intimation shall direct for sealing of all the packing machines available in the factory for the said period under the physical supervision of Superintendent of Central Excise, in the manner that the packing machines so sealed cannot be operated during the said period : Provided that during such period, no manufacturing activity, whatsoever, in respect of notified goods shall be undertaken and no removal of notified goods shall be effected by the manufacturer except that notified goods already produced before the commencement of said p....