Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 644 - AT - Central ExciseExemption benefit on clearance of goods to UNICEF by the appellant's 100% EOU under N/N. 108/95-CE dated 28.08.1995 - denial of benefit on the ground that this Notification is not extended to the 100% EOU and the same is applicable only to DTA Unit - HELD THAT:- The appellant have claimed the Exemption Notification No. 108/95-CE dated 28.08.1995 but the same is not available to the 100% EOU. However, there is no dispute that while calculating the duty of Excise in case of 100% EOU, all duties of customs to be taken along with the Exemption Notification of customs for calculating the duty for clearance of goods by 100% EOU - In the present case, the clearance of customs goods to UNICEF is clearly covered by Customs Notification No 84/97-Cus dated 11.11.1997, therefore, even if the Exemption Notification No. 108/95-CE dated 28.08.1995 is not available to the appellant but the benefit of Custom Notification 84/97-Cus has to be extended for calculating the duty and since the said Notification exempts the custom duty, the appellant is not liable to pay any duty. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon on the exactly identical issue a judgment of RATANGIRI TEXTILES LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR-II [2003 (6) TMI 136 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI], LUCKY STAR INTERNATIONAL VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [2000 (7) TMI 964 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and HANDUM INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABAD [2005 (4) TMI 239 - CESTAT, BANGALORE]. Moreover similar view has been expressed by the Tribunal in case of GENERAL OPTICS (ASIA) LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., PONDICHERRY [2004 (3) TMI 252 - CESTAT, CHENNAI], therefore, it is not the findings of the Commissioner on his independent view but is supported by various decision. The appellant are eligible for exemption even if not by virtue of Notification No. 108/95 but by the virtue of Notification No. 84/97-Cus. Accordingly, the demand is not sustainable - Appeal allowed.
|