Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (9) TMI 494 - CESTAT, MUMBAIBenefit of Notification No. 47/94 and Notification No. 43/2001 - Manufacture of Textiles and Made-up Articles - Assesses were operating under Rule 13(1)(b) of Central Excise Rules, 1944/Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2001 and they were manufacturing made-up articles - Appellants were job workers and were operating under Rule 13(1)(b) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 upto 30-6-2001 and thereafter under Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2001 and 2002 - they were holding Central Excise registration for manufacture of textiles and made-up articles falling under Chapter 63 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - Revenue demanded duty leviable on fabrics on the quantity of fents, rags and chindies in excess of percentage proved by the department - whereas job workers claimed that they had discharged the duty liability as leviable on fents, rags and chindies - Held that:- The duty on the waste generated in form of fents, rags and chindies was payable by M/s. SGP and GTC in terms of these Notifications No. 47/94 and 43/2001 only After going through the Notification No. 47/94 and Notification No. 43/2001 – the notifications had been issued under Rule 13 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2001 respectively for receiving the goods without payment of duty for manufacture of export goods. These notifications contain many conditions to be fulfilled by the manufacturer or processor - There was a specific provision in these notifications for the waste generated during the processing/manufacture of the export goods - Dutiablity of waste will be governed by the specific provisions under notification - If the duty was demanded on waste as applicable to fabrics under Chapter X procedure or Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001, then provisions relating to the waste under these notifications will become redundant - As regards the execution of bond, movement of goods under AR-3 procedure, maintenance of account of goods received, submission of quarterly RT-11 return etc., the manufacturer was required to follow the Chapter X procedure or procedure under the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 – Appeal filed by the Assesses was allowed – Decided in favour of Assessees. The Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed the appeals of M/s. SGP and GTC holding that as the procedures prescribed under Notification No. 47/94 (para 5(a) and Notification No. 43/2001) were followed by the manufacturer/processor - the duty under Rule 6 of the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 was not recoverable and there was no suppression of the facts as returns were filed by them regularly with the department - We do not find any infirmity in these findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) - the Orders-in-Appeal was upheld and Revenue’s appeals were rejected.
|