News Update

DRI nabs Dubai-bound pax with FC worth Rs 1.93 croresCX - Too late for Revenue to complain that there is non-compliance by Settlement Commission with mandatory provisions of law: High CourtI-T - Tax Recovery Officer cannot summarily assume powers under Indian Contract Act, 1872, to suo motu declare a transaction of sale to be void & without approaching civil court: HCI-T - Expenses incurred for purely business purposes not being incurred on employees, would not attract Fringe Benefit Tax: HCCX - General practice amongst masses to not consider trading as an 'exempted service' till amendment was made in CCR - assessee had no malafide intention to avail undue benefit: CESTATCJI impeachment - Opposition Parties finally do it; hands over Notice to Vice PresidentBRICS discusses constitution of Working Group on illicit financial flowsCBDT shifts DGHRD office to Jawaharlal Nehru StadiumCBIC clarifies that remnant fuels (HSD/LDO) (after ship breaking) are classifiable under Chapter 27 and free from import policy restrictionsI-T - Mere projection of profit statement found in loose sheets from taxpayer's premises, is no basis for levying penalty in his hands: ITATGoM on Transport recommends uniform road tax structureCX - Assessee taking credit on rejected goods, recyling same and paying duty on clearance alleging that credit has been availed irregularly is unsubstantiated no question of double duty : CESTATGovt seeks feedback to Draft Coastal Regulation ZoneI-T - Payments made to founder or relative of trust, if credited to trust's account immediately without taking any undue benefit from it, will not upset exemption benefit u/s 11: ITATFC to individually assess needs of each State: NK SinghCX Mere reiteration of order of penalty imposed by original authority, who had jurisdiction, by first appellate authority, who lacked jurisdiction, does not cause grievance to appellant at that stage: CESTATGoM on Transport recommends uniform road tax and national permits for buses and taxisJustice Loya death case - SC dismisses pleasChennai Customs nabs pax coming from Dubai with gold worth Rs 2.5 Cr + also seizes 7.5 kg of seahorses during vehicle checkGovt to give new award to certain ranks of Civil servantsVAT - Reimbursement received by dealer for supply of spare parts to its customers under warranty period, are not liable to VAT under Maharashtra VAT Act: HCIT - Where Revenue detects massive tax evasion through bogus bills, it cannot wash hands of it through mere additions: ITATIT - Failure to explain scientific method in determining the amount of performance bonus payable to employees can lead to its disallowance : ITATST - Demand of differential amount of service tax alleging that entire amount collected by PCO operator is subject to levy of service tax cannot sustain for period prior to 01.03.2011: CESTATIndia almost ready with Rs 600 Crore Chandrayaan-2Govt launches Study in India Portal for foreign studentsAfter issuance of SCN, write to noticees about availing window of Settlement Commission for early settlement of disputes - CBIC instructs fieldCBDT Diktat on Misconduct - But, Mr Prime Minister, Actual High-handedness lies in Revenue Target Fixation!
 
CX -Tanker is not bulk pack, therefore, activity of unloading edible oil and converting into retail pack and labeling is not manufacture: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, FEB 17, 2017: THE case of the Department is that the activity of conversion of edible oil from tanker to retail pack and labeling amounts to manufacture u/s 2(f) of CEA, 1944 and accordingly, the repacked refined edible oil is liable to duty.

In appeal before the CESTAT, the appellant submitted that the issue is no more in dispute as in the appellant's own case decided by the Tribunal vide Order No. A/90742/16/EB dated 01.09.2016, it has been held that repacking of RBDP almolein Oil received in tanker in bulk and repacking them into smaller packs does not amount to manufacture. Reliance is also placed on the decisions in Anwar Oils - 2015-TIOL-2837-CESTAT-MUM, Amritlal Chemaux Ltd. - 2015-TIOL-130-SC-CX, Ammonia Supply Co. - 2011-TIOL-1400-CESTAT-MUM, Ruchi Health Foods Ltd. - 2006-TIOL-1948-CESTAT-MAD.

The AR submitted that the demand of duty has been correctly raised and confirmed in view of Chapter Note 4 to Chapter 15 of the CETA, 1985, which reads -

"4. In relation to products of sub-heading Nos. 1502.00, 1503.00, 1504.00 and 1508.90, labeling or relabeling of containers and packing from bulk packs to retails packs or the adoption of any other treatment to render the product marketable to consumer, shall amount to manufacture."

On the Chapter note referred by the AR, the Bench observed -

+ From the chapter note, it is seen that if the goods are repacked from bulk pack to retail packs and also labeled then the activity shall amount to manufacture.

+ In the facts of the present case, the edible oil received in the tanker was unloaded and then converted into retail pack and labeled. As per the judgments relied upon by the appellant, it has been consistently held that the conversion of the product from tanker to retail pack is not conversion of bulk packs to retail packs because the tanker in which goods are received is not bulk pack, therefore, one limb of the Chapter Note that packing from bulk pack to retail pack does not satisfy.

+ Though there is an activity of labeling but as per the Chapter Note 4 prevailing at the relevant time, the activity of repacking from bulk pack to retail pack and also labeling, both should be carried out in order to hold manufacture under Note 4 to the Chapter 15.

+ There is no activity of repacking from bulk packs to retail packs and only labeling alone is carried out, therefore, the activity does not amount to manufacture.

The impugned order was set aside and the appeals were allowed.

In passing: Interestingly, in the matter of the stay application filed by the appellant, the Bench had ordered a pre-deposit of Rs.1 lakh. See - 2006-TIOL-658-CESTAT-MUM

(See 2017-TIOL-499-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS