The Delhi High Court has held that the Student Almanac and teacher planner were not eligible for duty and, therefore, the assessee have not declared them in their excise returns.
The bench of Justice Mr. Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that the assessee had not intimated the department in any other way about the manufacture of these goods and therefore, the assessee had an intention to evade payment of duty and for that reason the assessee had willfully suppressed facts. Therefore, an extended period of limitation was correctly invoked.
The issue in dispute is regarding the classification of goods namely Student Almanac and teacher planner, Diaries, Workbook, Calendars, Note-Pads and Scrap books.
The appellant/assessee is a printer who prints on paper and manufactures various articles of printing and was paying central excise duty on certain goods, such as, exercise books classifiable under Chapter 48 and on certain other products, such as, calendars, drawing books, diaries which are classifiable under Chapter 49. It was not paying duty on letter pads and note
The printed these goods and removed them at nil rate of duty classifying them under Chapter 49 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, which Chapter covers printed books, newspapers, pictures and other products of printing industry.
The case of the Department is that these goods fall under Chapter 48 as ‘Articles of Paper or of Paper Board’ and attract duty @ 12.5% ad valorem. The assessee had wrongly not paid duty and, therefore, the extended period of limitation was invokable and that Shri Kishore Mittal, the Director of the assessee was liable to penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.
The Joint Commissioner confirmed the demand along with interest and imposed an equal amount of penalty on the assessee and also imposed penalty of Rs. 10,000 on Shri Kishore Mittal, Director under Rule 26 of the Rules.
On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the confirmation of demand only on two products namely Student Almanac and teacher planner and only for the normal period of limitation. He set aside the demand for the extended period of limitation and also the penalty imposed on the assessee. He also set aside the penalty imposed on Shri Kishore Mittal, the Director of the assessee.
The tribunal while dealing with classification of Student Almanac and teacher planner, accepted the submission of the assessee and held that the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of exemption on waste and scrap.
Case Details
Case Title: M/s Sona Printers Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Central Tax, Appeal – II, Delhi
Case No.: EXCISE APPEAL NO. 55542 OF 2023
Date: 24.03.2025
Counsel For Appellant: Ratnesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel For Respondent: Rajesh Kumar
