Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2015 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 60 - HC - Central ExciseAbatement under sub-section (3) of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Closure of factory - Held that:- As per sub-clause (a) of the Rule 96ZO (2), manufacturer has to inform, in writing, about the closer of factory to the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise with a copy to the Superintendent, Central Excise, either prior to the date of closer or on the date of closer. - There is no material available on the record that intimation for closer of the factory was sent and got received in the office of Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise and in the office of Superintendent of Central Excise either on 01.09.1997 or prior to 01.09.1997. - Undisputedly, fax was sent and received in the office of Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise on 02.09.1997, however, factory, according to the petitioner, was closed with effect from 01.09.1997, it means that intimation about the closer of the unit was sent and received after the closer of the unit. Therefore, petitioner has not made compliance of clause (a) of Rule 96ZO (2). - This is the settled position of law to take benefit of concession/abatement, manufacturer is duty bound to follow the strict procedure given under the Act or Rules which admittedly petitioner has not done - Decided against assessee.
|