Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 1092 - CESTAT ALLAHABADCompounded levy scheme - Section 3A of the Act read with Rule 96ZP(3)of Central Excise Rules, 1944 - whether the option given earlier in the month of August by the appellant assessee remains valid and good for the amended and/or substituted compounded levy scheme with effect from 1st September, 1997 - Held that: - Admittedly, Rule 96ZP(3) stood substituted with effect from 01/09/1997. Accordingly, the option given under the original Rule 96ZP(3), if any becomes redundant and stale on substitution of Sub-rule (3) of Rule 96ZP. Admittedly, there is no fresh option given as provided in Sub-rule (4) of Rule 96ZP in terms of the substituted Rule 96ZP(3) on or after 30/08/1997 - the appellant have never acted upon in terms of the said declaration, which is found otherwise redundant and stale in terms of the amended provisions as from the very beginning, soon after the implementation of the compounded levy scheme with effect from 01/09/1997, the appellant have opted to pay categorically on the basis of actual production under Section 3 of the Act which is evident from the averments before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in their writ petition and also evident from their letter dated 21/11/1997 filed before the ld. Commissioner. The appellant is entitled to pay duty under the normal scheme of Section 3 and under the provisions of Section 3A(4) on actual production basis. The appellant will be entitled to consequential benefits of adjustment of duty etc. if any paid in excess in accordance with law - the Adjudicating Authority were directed to determine the duty on the basis of actual production taking into account the returns filed by the appellant and allow adjustment of duty already deposited - appeal allowed by way of remand.
|