9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 202X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Thousand Seven Hundred and Forty Nine only) paid by them through their account current (PLA) during the month of March, 2006. The said refund claim was filed in terms of paragraph 3(A) of the Notification No.32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999 being a new industrial unit which commenced its commercial production on or after 24.12.1997. After due verification, the adjudicating authority had sanctioned part of the refund claim. In reducing the refund claim the ld.adjudicating authority observed that the appellant purchased caps and availed CENVAT Credit on the same and after fitting it on the tubes cleared the same on payment of duty. He has observed that caps of the empty tubes is not an integral part of such tubes and the value of such caps are not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty of excise as the case may be which is leviable thereon under any of the said acts. Therefore, the exemption from payment of duty would be granted provided the said duty of excise be chargeable on such excisable goods as per section 3 of Central Excise Act, 1944 and primarily the goods ought be manufactured under section 2(f) of the said Act. In other wards, since the fitting of, bought out caps on the tubes does not involve a process of manufacture as per Section 2(f) of the Act and accordingly no duty is leviable on the said bought out caps, hence, benefit of exemption Notification No.32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999 cannot be extended on the said bought out caps. The ld.A.R. referred to the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue of the tubes. Distinguish the facts, he has submitted that in that case the caps were supplied free of cost by the supplier M/s. Colgate whereas in the present case, the respondent purchased the caps and after fitting the same into the bare tubes in an integrated process, cleared the excisable goods, namely, Lamitubes to the customers on payment of duty to which the department never objected. Further he has submitted that the department for subsequent period has allowed refund on the said Lamitubes while re-considering the order No.54/R-03/2006 dated 31.03.2006. In de novo proceedings vide order No.03/CEX/TECH-I/ACG/2009 dated 08.05.2009. Also, recently, by an order dated 16.02.2012, the department has sanctioned refund on the said Lamit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rea or Commercial Estates or Scheme Area. - In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), read with sub-section (3) of section 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 (58 of 1957) and sub-section (3) of section 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (Textiles and Textile Articles) Act, 1978 (40 of 1978), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts the goods specified in the First Schedule and the Second Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) other than- 2[(i) the following goods, namely, - &nb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by them from their factory. Hence it is illogical and incorrect to allege that the Lamitubes fitted with caps were not subjected to levy of any duty but only the bare Lamitubes which were manufactured and cleared by the applicant and leviable to duty. Consequently, only bare lamitubes were eligible to the said Notification, but not the duty paid caps which were purchased and fitted with the Lamitubes, even when the Lamitubes with caps were cleared as a whole unit and excise duty was paid on it, and not contended by the department. 8. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata vs. Rupa & Co. Ltd. - 2004 (170) ELT 129 (SC) that an exemption Notification has to be construed strictly but the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that exemptions are to be strictly interpreted while some of them insist that exemptions in fiscal statutes are to be liberally interpreted giving an apparent impression that they are contradictory to each other. But this is only apparent. A close scrutiny will reveal that there is no real contradiction amongst the judgments at all. The synthesis of the views is quite clearly that the general rule is strict interpretation while special rule in the case of beneficial and promotional exemption is liberal interpretation. The two go very well with each other because they relate to two different sets of circumstances." 10. Applying the principles laid down in the above cases we find that the present Notification No.32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999 is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
