TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 403X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts are that the Appellants who manufacture motor vehicles, also manufacture tools, dies, fixtures and guages at their plant No. II. Some of these tools, etc., were cleared and sent by them to their other units without observing Central Excise Procedure and without payment of duty. When a show cause notice dated 5-3-1990 was issued to them for demanding Central Excise duty for the period from 1-2-1985 to 28-2-1986, they claimed the exemption from payment of duty under Notification Nos. 72/83-C.E. and 118/75. The Collector, Central Excise, Aurangabad, in the impugned order dated 3-5-1991, confirmed the demand of duty amounting to Rs. 4,77,986/- holding that the Appellants did not follow the Central Excise procedure; that it was only after th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grounds of procedural lapse if the assessee was entitled to the benefit. He placed reliance on the decision in the case of Thermax P. Ltd. v. C.C. - 1992 (61) E.L.T. 352 (SC), Solar Pesticides Ltd. v. U.O.I. - 1992 (57) E.L.T. 201 (Bom.), C.C.E. v. Sanchem Enterprises - 1990 (50) E.L.T. 528 (T), Hyderabad Allwyn Industries v. C.C.E. - 1990 (45) E.L.T. 584, Grasim industries v. C.C.E. - 1990 (47) E.L.T. 459 and Kissan Products v. C.C.E., Kanpur - 1990 (47) E.L.T. 547. He further mentioned that similar matter of the Appellants for the subsequent period was dispersed of in their favour as reported in 1999 (31) RLT 257 (T) holding that non following of Chapter X Procedure would not operate as a ground to deny the benefit of exemption Notificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents by submitting that the Appellants had done nothing to claim the benefit of the Notifications; they had neither filed the classification list declaring that they were manufacturing the impugned products, nor followed any Central Excise procedure and nor paid the Central Excise duty; that before the benefit of exemption can be extended to them, the conditions specified in the Notifications are to be fulfilled; that the units receiving the impugned goods are required to be licensed and the goods can be cleared by the Appellants without payment of duty only on the presentation of the C.T. 2 Certificates issued by the Central Excise Officer and as none of these things were complied with the exemption from payment of duty was not available t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t out in Chapter X of the Central Excise Rules. It is not in-dispute that the goods in question were exempted from payment of duty and goods were removed to the other units of the appellants. The Appellants, however, neither filed classification lists claiming the benefit of exemption from payment of duty as provided under both the Notifications nor followed the procedure as set out in Chapter X of the Central Excise Rules. Without going into the question of availability of exemption on account of non complying with the conditions of the Notification, we find substantial force in the submissions of the ld. Advocate that the extended period of limitation as provided in Section 11A(1) of Central Excise Act is not applicable in the light of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
