Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

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

2023 (5) TMI 291

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Paper Ltd. [Unit No. 1] are engaged in the manufacture of writing and printing paper falling under Chapter 48 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 3. During the course of Audit, the internal Audit party, Hqrs. Office Chandigarh observed that the respondent vide sale invoices No. 534 dated 20.02.2003 has cleared 10.102 MT of Newprint-in-reels under chapter sub-heading No. 4801.00 valued at Rs. 237397/- at nil rate of duty to "Akhand Jyoti Masik". In order to ascertain the type of publication titled "Akhand Jyoti Masik" publication issue of August 2003 was procured by the department and found that the "Akhand Jyoti" is a monthly publication, which is in bound form, containing mainly spiritual articles of Hindu religion and he....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urther submitted that the item 'Newsprint-in-reels' in different from 'Newsprint-in reels or sheets' and the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly held that the goods are specifically and separately classifiable under chapter heading No. 4801.00. He also submits that the exemption notification has to be strictly construed. He also submits that the Ld. Commissioner has wrongly relied upon the decision of NEPA vs. CCE Indore reported as 2002 (149) ELT 0354. He further submits that the said decision is not applicable in the facts of the present case. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent reiterated the findings in the impugned order and submitted that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly cl....