Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 1988 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1988 (5) TMI 253 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeals. 2. Duty liability on the manufacture of crude sodium sulphate without power. 3. Interpretation of exemption notification No. 179/77. 4. Time-barred demand for Central Excise duty. 5. Applicability of previous judgments on the use of power in manufacturing processes. Analysis: 1. The case involved two appeals filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) New Delhi. The issue of condonation of delay in filing the appeal arose as the Collector claimed that the appellate order was received late. The Tribunal held that the appeal was filed within the limitation period, as the appellate order was deemed to have been received on 27-2-1984, and the appeal was filed in time, so the question of condonation of delay did not arise. 2. The primary issue for consideration was the duty liability on the manufacture of crude sodium sulphate without the use of power. The respondents were manufacturing crude sodium sulphate during the process of salt production. The Collector (Appeals) ruled in favor of the respondents, stating that no duty was payable as the power used was only for pumping brine, not in the actual manufacture of sodium sulphate. The Tribunal upheld this decision, citing the judgment of the Gujarat High Court and Notification No. 179/77. 3. The Tribunal analyzed the interpretation of exemption Notification No. 179/77, which exempts goods manufactured without the aid of power from Central Excise duty. The Tribunal agreed with the Collector (Appeals) that the power used for pumping brine did not disqualify the respondents from the exemption, as per the Gujarat High Court judgment and the notification. 4. The respondents argued that the demand for duty was time-barred, relying on the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in a similar case. The Tribunal examined the facts and held that the manufacture of sodium sulphate by the respondents was without the aid of power, aligning with the Gujarat High Court's interpretation, and thus, no duty was leviable. 5. In a separate order, another judge concurred with the dismissal of the appeals. The judge discussed the timeline for filing appeals under the Central Excises and Salt Act, emphasizing that the limitation period did not commence until the order was directly communicated to the Collector of Central Excise, not when the Executive Collector obtained a copy through the Assistant Collector. Therefore, no question of condonation of delay arose in this instance.
|