Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (2) TMI 517 - AT - Central ExciseStay of Operation of the Order - Procure raw materials duty free - Removal of goods at concessional rate of duty for manufacture of excisable goods Rules, 2001 - Such materials could be used as inputs in the manufacture of tower parts to be cleared under exemption - Notification No.108/95-C.E. dated 28.8.1995 - Held that - The materials sought to be procured by the assessee were not specified under any exemption notification and such materials could not have been procured by following the procedure laid down under the aforesaid Rules. Therefore order is ex facie illegal, its operation has to be stayed lest the respondent should take undue benefit on the strength of the impugned order. Stay of operation of the order granted. In favour of revenue
Issues:
Stay of operation of the impugned order allowing duty-free procurement of raw materials under Central Excise Rules. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE, delivered by P.G. Chacko, addressed the issue of seeking a stay on the operation of an order that allowed the respondent to procure raw materials duty-free under the Central Excise Rules. The department, represented by the Additional Commissioner, filed an application seeking a stay on the impugned order issued by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The impugned order permitted the respondent to procure raw materials duty-free for manufacturing tower parts to be cleared under a specific exemption notification. The learned Addl. Commissioner argued that the materials sought by the assessee were not covered under any exemption notification, and therefore, the procedure for duty-free procurement should not have been allowed. The original authority had rejected the application for duty-free procurement, but the learned Commissioner (Appeals) overturned this decision. The Tribunal noted that there was no opposition to the application despite notice. After examining the records and hearing the submissions, the Tribunal agreed with the argument presented by the learned Addl. Commissioner that the impugned order was legally unsustainable. As a result, the Tribunal decided to stay the operation of the order until the final disposal of the appeal, preventing the respondent from benefiting from the order in question. This judgment highlights the importance of adherence to the provisions of exemption notifications and the Central Excise Rules in the procurement of raw materials for manufacturing goods eligible for duty exemptions. It underscores the significance of legal sustainability in decisions made by appellate authorities, ensuring that undue benefits are not granted based on orders that do not conform to the law. The Tribunal's decision to stay the operation of the impugned order serves as a precautionary measure to prevent any potential misuse of the order until the appeal is conclusively resolved.
|