Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 962 - AT - Central ExciseConcessional rate of duty under N/N. 6/2002 dated 01.03.2002 as amended - manufacture of PP Medicines - the basic reason for denial of benefit and confirmation of duty is that the disposition report contains row at the bottom having signature with date 20.07.2005 - Held that:- Commissioner (Appeals) has decided the said report solely on the ground that the column in the bottom shows date of 20.07.2005 whereas the actual report is claimed to have been made on 29.05.2007. The defense of the appellant is that the said proforma was made as a result of efforts of a team to draft the standards operating procedure for such disposition. The draft finalized by the said team contains a row in the bottom which shows the date when the said proforma for making the disposition report was approved. It has been argued that in all the disposition report said date and signature at the bottom would appear, as a part of the profroma, not as part of the report. We find significant force in the arguments of the appellants as can be seen from the standards operating procedure report submitted by them as Annexure-F to the appeal. However, it is seen that the said report and the said argument was not submitted before the lower authorities. Though prima facie, we find substance in the argument of the appellant, however, since it is new fact brought on record, we deem it proper to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original authority to reconsider after taking into account. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|