TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 929X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... framed under Section 3A(1), it is clear that these rules Shave been framed keeping in view the widespread duty evasion by Pan masala/Gutka manufacturers and the provisions of various rules of Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 including Rule 10 thereof must be seen in this background. The interpretation of Rule 10 sought by the appellant would be not only against the provisions of this rule but would also be against the smooth functioning of the system of collection of duty from Gutka/Pan masala units, as envisaged under these Rules. It appears that it is not the case of the appellant that during the period of abatement, there was total stoppage of production and clearances. - There i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d with Rule 8 of Packing Machine Rules,2010, there were 2 operating packing machines installed in the factory premises of the appellant during the month. The Central Excise duty as prescribed vide Notification No.16/2010-CE dated 27.2.2010 as amended by vide Notification No.19/2010-CE dated 13.4.2010, was required to be calculated by the appellant under Rule 7 of the Packing Machine Rules,2010 and the same was required to be paid by 5th day of the same month (for machine operating for 1st day of the month) under Rule 9 ibid. However, it was noticed that: (i) One single tract (without lime) packing machine for packing pouches of RSP (retail sale price) of ₹ 2.00 (hereinafter called as First Machine ) was operative for the period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was issued to the appellant as to why their abatement claim of ₹ 7,12,500/- which was not in agreement with provisions of the relevant rules should not be rejected. Subsequently, vide the impugned Order-in-Original, the claim of abatement of duty of the appellant was rejected. 5. The Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the order of rejection of rebate claim by the assessment Commissioner. Aggrieved with the said order, the appellant is before me. 4. The contention of the ld.Consultant is that as per Notification No.16/10 which specifies the rate of duty per packing machine per month and the same cannot be charged for full month in case the same remained operative for part of the month in terms Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of Superintendent of Central Excise, in the manner that these cannot be operated during the said period: Provided that during such period, no manufacturing activity, whatsoever, in respect of notified goods shall be undertaken and no removal of goods shall be effected by the manufacturer: Provided further that when the manufacturer intends to restart his production of notified goods, he shall inform to the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise or the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, of the date from which he would restart production, whereupon the seal fixed on packing machines would be opened under the physical supervision of Superintendent of Central Excise. From the perusal of this Rule, it is cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rules framed under Section 3A(1), it is clear that these rules Shave been framed keeping in view the widespread duty evasion by Pan masala/Gutka manufacturers and the provisions of various rules of Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 including Rule 10 thereof must be seen in this background. The interpretation of Rule 10 sought by the appellant would be not only against the provisions of this rule but would also be against the smooth functioning of the system of collection of duty from Gutka/Pan masala units, as envisaged under these Rules. It appears that it is not the case of the appellant that during the period of abatement, there was total stoppage of production and clearances. 9. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
