9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (12) TMI 366 - AT - Central ExciseWaiver of pre-deposit - Notification 22/2003 - The demand has arisen on the ground that the appellant being an EOU had procured an insecticide without payment of duty and had sent the same to the farmers for using it on the agricultural produce Gherkins - the applicant/appellant is permitted to take out the goods for the purpose to the fields and farms of contract farmers and the said goods which have been taken out are nothing but insecticides - the applicant has made out a prima facie case for the waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved - Decided in the favour of assessee
Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of duty amount. 2. Eligibility for benefit under Notification 22/2003-C.E. Analysis: 1. The appellant filed an application for the waiver of pre-deposit of duty amount of Rs. 3,90,873. The demand arose as the appellant, an EOU, procured insecticides without paying duty and sent them to farmers for use on agricultural produce "Gherkins." The adjudicating authority initially dropped the proceedings, but the Revenue appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals), who set aside the order and confirmed the demands. However, on perusal of Notification 22/2003, it was found that the appellant falls under the clause as a person manufacturing and packaging articles for export, which includes exporting Gherkins. The Notification permits taking out goods to the fields and farms of contract farmers, which in this case were insecticides. The Tribunal found the adjudicating authority was correct in dropping the proceedings initiated by the show-cause notice. 2. The Tribunal noted that the applicant/appellant was permitted under the Notification to take out goods, which included insecticides, to the fields and farms of contract farmers. It was observed that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for the waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the application, waived the condition for pre-deposit of the amounts, and stayed the recovery thereof until the appeal's disposal. The decision was pronounced and dictated in open court by the Tribunal.
|
