CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION
2008-TIOL-81-SC-CX.pdf + prachi sc story.pdf
M/s Prachi industries Vs CCE, Chandigarh (Dated : March 28, 2008)
Swagging amounts to manufacture: Swaging is a general term which is applied to a number of Metal Forming Operations. Production Swaging Operations are commonly performed on rotary swaging machines. Swaging has proved to be an economical production method for forming shapes confined to a portion of the total length of a given pipe or tube, by tapering, pointing, reducing or sizing. Swaging process is also used for joining and fastening operations. It is also used in assembling two or more components by joining a bushing to a shaft, swaging of rings onto wire for use as electrical connectors, and for attaching fittings to tubes.
MS plane pipe/tube can carry water to the overhead tank whereas the workpiece produced in the present case is useful as a decorative item or as an item which provides a strong grip in the case of auto-rickshaw. Therefore, a distinguishable identity is acquired of a lasting character imparted to a plane MS pipe/tube by use of dies and presses.
Manufacture - process: The definition of "manufacture" includes "any process incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured product". Therefore, on analyzing Section 2(f), it becomes clear that the word "process" must be in relation to manufacture. By this definition, it is made clear that the process must be incidental to the completion of the manufactured product. In other words, incidental process must be an integral part of manufacture resulting in a finished product which has to be of a different physical shape, size and use. The said process must impart a change of lasting character to the original product or raw material. After the process, a new finished product must come into existence. It comes into existence only when it acquires a distinguishable identity. For example, in the case of blending of ore what emerges after the process of blending is an ore but of different type. Once the process amounts to manufacture, the fact that the goods belong to the same entry would not be relevant. : SUPREME COURT; 2008-TIOL-80-SC-CX.pdf
CCE, Meerut Vs Motherson Sumi Systems ltd (Dated : April 24, 2008) Central Excise - Job work - Value of free supply of inputs not includible in the assessable value - Revenue's appeal dismissed : SUPREME COURT;
2008-TIOL-650-CESTAT-MAD.pdf + kiosk story.pdf
M/s HCL Peripherals Vs CCE, Chennai (Dated : April 2, 2008)
Inappropriate application of common parlance test: It is common knowledge that information technology is a fast-developing phenomenon and the commoners in our country are yet to keep pace with it. Common parlance is, therefore, likely to lag behind technological parlance. Those associated with the technology, manufacture and marketing of the kiosks- like the appellants and the ELCOT functionary – will identify these machines today as computers customized for special purposes, but the laymen may take some more time to do so. Therefore, in our considered view, the Commissioner applied the common parlance test inappropriately to the kiosks in question. He ought to have gone by the Explanation to the Notification, which explained the term ‘computer', rather than by common parlance.”
Cost does not decide computer: “Would the commissioner treat laptops, palmtops etc. [which are much more expensive than desktops] not to be computers? The dictionary produced by learned SDR, itself, says that computers range widely in performance, costs etc. Learned Commissioner has also reasoned that, as the appellants called their machine ‘kiosk' and not computer, it cannot be treated as computer. In this regard also, it would suffice to say that, if an ADP machine commonly called ‘laptop' or ‘notebook' can be accepted as a computer in generic sense, a kiosk can also be so accepted.
Kiosk is a computer: “We have found the kiosk in question to be a computer of Heading 84.71 of the CETA Schedule attracting concessional ‘nil' rate of duty under Sl.No. 261 of the Table annexed to Notification No. 6/2002-CE (as amended) for the relevant period. Hence there can be no demand of duty, nor any penalty, on the appellants. The impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed.” : CHENNAI CESTAT; 2008-TIOL-647-CESTAT-BANG.pdf
M/s Jindal Aluminium Ltd Vs CCE, Bangalore III (Dated : February 18, 2008)
Central Excise – Refund – Unjust enrichment - The appellant had not established that the duty burden had not been passed on to the buyers. There is a statutory presumption that duty burden has been passed on to the buyer. The burden is on the appellant to prove the contrary. Appeal dismissed : BANGALORE CESTAT; 2008-TIOL-646-CESTAT-BANG.pdf
M/s Alstom Projects India Ltd Vs CCE, Belgaum (Dated : February 7, 2008)
Central Excise – Shortages – Principles of Natural Justice - Evidence on record not considered by authorities. Matter remanded to reconsider the evidence on record. : BANGALORE CESTAT; 2008-TIOL-645-CESTAT-BANG.pdf
CCE, Belgaum Vs M/s Bellary Steel & Alloys Ltd (Dated : January 1, 2008)
Credit on cost of PVC Pipes [Capital Goods] is allowed – PVC pipes form a pipeline from the water source outside to the factory premises, though the pipeline from water source is outside the factory premises : BANGALORE CESTAT; 2008-TIOL-644-CESTAT-KOL.pdf
M/s Calcutta Chemicals Co Ltd Vs CCE, Kolkata V (Dated : March 4, 2008) Combination package – Neem Toothpaste given free with two Margo Soaps – No cause for adding the value of free toothpaste to retail price of Margo soap u/s 4A of CEA'44 – appeal allowed.
Sub Section (2) of Section 4A being an over riding provision to section 4 in respect of valuation of packaged goods, MRP declared on the package is the only value for excisability of the contents in the package – SC decision in Jayanti Food Processing (P) Ltd. ( 2007-TIOL-150-SC-CX ) relied upon. : KOLKATA CESTAT;
SERVICE TAX SECTION
2008-TIOL-649-CESTAT-BANG.pdf
M/s Colours of The World Vs CCE, Cochin (Dated : February 5, 2008) Service Tax – Advertising Agency - Appellant has challenged the computation of tax liability on various grounds. Matter remanded to re-compute the tax liability. : BANGALORE CESTAT; 2008-TIOL-648-CESTAT-MUM.pdf
Cozy Interiors Pvt Ltd Vs CST, Mumbai (Dated : February 26, 2008)
ST - Execution of civil work, false ceiling work, carpentry work, painting and plumbing work, electrical and any other interior related work as per the plan and design provided by architects or consultants of the customers - Prima facie services not covered under category of “Interior decorator” as they are not rendering any advice, services related to planning, design of spaces – Pre-deposit of Service Tax of Rs.91.43 lakhs & penalties waived. : MUMBAI CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION
2008-TIOL-651-CESTAT-BANG.pdf
M/s Honeywell Technology Solution Lab Pvt Ltd Vs CC, Bangalore (Dated : February 26, 2008) Customs – Import – 100% EOU – Exemption – Notification allows benefit of exemption to security equipment. Safety is a part of security. Hence the benefit of the exemption is also available to safety equipment. : BANGALORE CESTAT; |