Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2008 (5) TMI 576

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... have been allowed Cenvat Credit of Rs. 16,26,52,280/-. The net duty demand thus comes to about Rs. 10 crores. They have filed application for stay and waiver in terms of Section 35-F of the Central Excise Act. Heard the parties on the said application at length. 2. The appellants who are engaged in the manufacture of tractors have three units at Faridabad situate in the same vicinity. There is no dispute about contiguity of unit nos. 2 and 3. As regards Unit No. 1, according to the appellant, the unit is situated across the road, while according to the Revenue, the distance is about 1.5 kms from Unit Nos. 2 and 3. This fact has been stated only for the sake of record and has little bearing on the merit of the stay applications. In Unit N .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rently is that there are now three separate registered units under the Central Excise Act/Rules casting a cloud of doubt on the appellant s entitlement to the exemption under the said Notifications. 5. Appearing for the appellants, Shri V. Lakshmikumaran made the following submissions : (i) the impugned order modifying the existing registration certificate which virtually amounts to revoking it, cannot be given retrospective effect. It was stated that the earlier order dated 2-9-2004 granting common registration was not appealed against by the Revenue which became final; (ii) even if the units are treated as separate registered units, the appellants would be entitled to the benefit of exemption, for, it is not necessary that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he context of the present dispute. 7. However, we are, prima facie, of the view that restoration of the erstwhile registration certificates cannot have retrospective effect. 8. Where there is one single registered unit, notwithstanding that the number of factories is more than one, the factory of production - of parts or tractors - would be deemed to be one - there being one legal entity. It is to be kept in mind that the unit or units , as such, are not registered -either singly or severally . Section 6 of the Central Excise Act read with Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules contemplates registration of a person who produces, manufacturers, carries on trade, holds private storeroom or warehouse or otherwise uses excisable goods . We ar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rroneous refund, as the case may be, was on the basis of any approval, acceptance or assessment relating to the rate of duty on or valuation of excisable goods under any other provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder, a Central Excise Officer may, within [one year] from the relevant date, serve notice on the person chargeable with the duty which has not been levied or paid or which has been short-levied or short paid or to whom the refund has erroneously been made, requiring him to show cause why he should not pay the amount specified in the notice : Provided that where any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded by reason of fraud, collusion or any wilful mis-st .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on a case of reclassification, it was held therein that differential duty cannot be recovered on the ground of short levy when duty was levied on the basis of an approved classification list, and re-classification of goods and consequential demand can be given only prospective effect from the date of issue of show cause notice. The Supreme Court approved the decision in Rainbow Industries (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Vadodara, 1994 (74) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.); wherein it was observed : Once the Department accepted the price list, acted upon it and the goods were cleared with the knowledge of the Department, then, in absence of any amendment in law or judicial pronouncement, the reclassification should be effective from the date the Department issued the sh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates