Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 264 - AT - Central Excise100% EOU - DTA sale of textile articles - exemption from payment of CVD under Notification No. 30/04 dated 9.7.2004 issued under Section 5A(1) of the Central Excise Act - whether the proviso to Section 5A(1) will be applicable in the present case while considering application of Notifications 29/2004 and 30/2004 - Held that:- There has been total mis-appreciation of this provision of law. Section 5A(1) only grants power to exempt excise duty leviable under Section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act. The proviso to section 5A(1) is only to state that even if there is exemption from Central Excise duty under section 3(1) on any goods produced in India, it will not imply that the exemption from Central Excise duty will also be automatically available on goods produced and cleared by a 100% EOU. It is quite obvious from this proviso that, by virtue of exemption under Section 5A(1), goods produced by a 100% EOU do not get automatically exempted. This is so because the duty payable by a 100% EOU is equal to the aggregate of customs duties. - The duty payable on goods produced and cleared by a 100% EOU is to be seen in terms of provisions of Section 3(1) and while calculating this duty, the CVD component is to be calculated on the basis of excise duty payable on such products produced in India. And if such duty payable is a concessional rate of duty in terms of a Notification, the same notification will apply for calculating CVD on goods produced and cleared by a 100% EOU. The findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue are not very clear. However, in view of our analysis, we agree with his conclusion that the proviso to section 5A(1) of the Central Excise Act is only applicable to the implementation of main Section 3(1). In the case of goods imported by a 100% EOU, the condition cannot be applied nor can it be enforced. The Revenue's appeal itself says that this condition is for indigenous manufacturer. This condition is obviously not applicable to goods imported. Therefore, we see no reason to deny the benefit of this notification. Reliance is placed on Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of SRF Ltd. v. CC [2015 (4) TMI 561 - SUPREME COURT]. In a similar situation and in the context of similar circumstances of Notification No. 6/2002, the Apex Court held that the assessee were entitled to the exemption from payment of CVD in terms of Notification No. 6/2002 as no credit could be availed nor was availed in respect of the imported goods. - Decided against Revenue.
|