From our Legal Corner - tomorrow's cases
Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.

By Vijay Kumar

Income Tax

Mixing of different kinds of tea does not amount to manufacture.

No! There is no mix up of excise and income tax cases. This was really an Income Tax case. For a change, the Supreme Court was dealing with the meaning of manufacture under the Income Tax Act. And the Central Excise definitions and cases came in handy. The assessee would be entitled to weighted deduction under section 35B(1A) of the Income Tax Act in case the goods exported were manufactured or produced in small scale industrial undertaking.

Central Excise

Goods removed for export destroyed due to unavoidable reasons - Accident caused to lorry - not deemed to have been removed from factory gate in terms of Sec 5 of CST Act as sale has not been completed - Demands cannot be raised : Tribunal

IS remission available if goods cleared for export are destroyed before they reach the port? This was the question before the Tribunal.

Under Central Excise Law, partnership is not a distinct entity - all partners of even a dissolved firm are liable : Tribunal Larger Bench

THE issue before the Larger Bench is whether outgoing partners are liable to pay excise duty assessed against a registered partnership firm, which was dissolved. Be careful before entering into a partnership with somebody to manufacture excisable goods. Even if you leave the partnership, you may be stuck with excise liabilities.

See our columns tomorrow for the judgements