M\/s K.K. Industries Versus Commissioner of Central GST, Noida
Central Excise
2018 (12) TMI 154 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI
CESTAT ALLAHABAD – AT
Dated:- 26-9-2018
APPEAL No. E\/70545\/2018-EX[DB] – FINAL ORDER NO-72630\/2018
Central Excise
Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical)
\nShri Rajesh Chhibber, Advocate for Appellant
\nShri Shiv Pratap Singh, Deputy Commissioner (AR), for Respondent
\nORDER
\nPer: Anil G. Shakkarwar
\nThe present appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. NOIDA-EXCUS-001-APP-1773-17-18 dated 28\/02\/2018 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Noida.
\n2. Brief facts of the case are that during the period from July, 2014 to June, 2016 appellant<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ferential duty by denying the said notification through show cause notice dated 06.01.2017 wherein a demand of Central Excise duty of Rs. 49,43,870\/- was raised. The said show cause notice was adjudicated through Order-in-Original dated 28.03.2017. The appellant contended before the Original Authority that they were manufacturing Sewing Machine Heads which were supplied to the customers without any electric control or electric motor and that no provision was made by them in the head for fitting\/attaching any motor and therefore, the goods manufactured by them were eligible for benefit of said notification. The Original Authority did not appreciate the said arguments and confirmed the demand and imposed equal penalty. Aggrieved by the said o<\/p>\n = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n e, only if the sewing machine is cleared in such a condition that it operated with electric motor then they were not eligible for benefit of the said notification. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s K.K. Industries Versus Commissioner of Central GST, NoidaCentral Excise2018 (12) TMI 154 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMICESTAT ALLAHABAD – ATDated:- 26-9-2018APPEAL No. E\/70545\/2018-EX[DB] – FINAL ORDER NO-72630\/2018Central ExciseSmt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Rajesh Chhibber, Advocate for Appellant Shri Shiv Pratap Singh, Deputy Commissioner (AR), for Respondent … Continue reading “M\/s K.K. Industries Versus Commissioner of Central GST, Noida”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15340","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15340","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=15340"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15340\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15340"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15340"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15340"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. Heard the learned A.R. who has supported the impugned order.
\n5. Having considered the rival contentions and on perusal of records and on careful examination of the entry in respect of which the said exemption was provided, we note that we understand from the wording of entry that if Sewing Machine are cleared in such a manner that they are not operated with electric motors then such Sewing Machines are cleared from the factory of manufacturer, thus they are eligible for the benefit of Notification No.1\/2011-CE dated 01.03.2011 as amended by Notification No.8\/2014-CE dated 11<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n