TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 incorporated at Ex.H. Fact : The facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows : 2.On 7-11-2003 petitioner claims to have established a manufacturing unit to process cotton/man-made fabrics at the factory premises referred to hereinabove. On 23rd December, 2003 petitioner applied to the Central Excise Department in the prescribed form to register its industrial unit under Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 formed under the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as Act and Rules for short). The said application came to be rejected by an order dated 19-2-2004 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Division IV, Kalyan, holding that the earlier holder of the Registration Certificate M/s. Jagruti T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation moved by the Petitioner, it has come to the notice of the department that the very same factory premises at 31 Ambernath, District Thane is already registered in the name of M/s. Jagruti Textile Processors having obtained central excise registration by them on 8-10-1999 for manufacturing cotton fabrics, man-made fabrics, embroidery fabrics and knitted fabrics and that M/s. Jagruti Textile Processors have neither till date surrendered their registration certificate nor applied for deregistration of their industrial unit.' The central excise dues amounting to Rs. 18.23 lacs are still due and recoverable from them along with interest as per Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules. In his submission, registration is allowed under Rule 9 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gruti Textile has not yet got their industrial unit deregistered from the Central Excise department as such it is not possible under Notification No. 35/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2002 to issue another registration certificate in the name of the petitioner for carrying out processing of fabrics in the very same industrial premises. 7.Shri Jetly further points out during investigation it was noticed that the same licensor M/s. Ludhiana Woolen and Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., had leased out the very same premises, 31 MIDC, Ambernath, Thane, to one M/s. Swastik Dyeing and Printing Mills Limited who had obtained excise registration on 1-10-1996 and failed to clear its dues in the sum of Rs. 9.36 lacs (Appr). The respondent- defendant has issued sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he form specified in Annexure III by depositing his registration certificate with the Superintendent of Central Excise. He further relied upon Para 2 of the said notification to content that if the person has more than one premises requiring registration, separate registration certificate is required to be obtained for each of such premises. Shri Jetly thus submits that the registration is qua premises and once registration qua petitioner's premises is granted it has permanent status unless it is suspended or revoked by Central Excise authorities or otherwise surrendered in accordance with rules framed in this behalf. Shri Jetly further submits that if such successive registrations in favour of different persons are allowed, then each regis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tore room or warehouse or other uses excisable goods is required to obtain registration under Rule 9 of the Rules. It is also not in dispute that under Rule 9(2) of the said Rules the Board has a power to issue notification and to prescribe conditions or limitations specifying person or class of persons who may not be required to obtain such registration. As per Rule 9(3) grant of registration is always subject to such conditions, safeguard and procedure as may be specified by the Board in the notification issued in this behalf. In the present case, original notification dated 26-6-2001 issued by the Board came to be amended by another notification dated 17-7-2002 wherein the, Board has prescribed safeguards, conditions and procedure for re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ificates in respect of that premises, then only, new person can get registration in respect of that premises. In this view of the matter, no fault can be found with the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise dated 19-2-2004, holding that earlier registrant M/s. Jagruti Textile Processors having not surrendered its registration certificate no new applicant can be registered in respect of the same premises. The view taken is a reasonable and possible view so as to prevent anybody from walking away from the registered premises without satisfying duty liability. 12.So far as the judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in case of Modi RJR (supra) is concerned, the same is distinguishable not only on facts of that case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
