9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 690X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred to as the "CESTAT") which had rejected the appeal of the Revenue thereby upholding the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals), Meerut dated 06.08.2004. 3. Prior to the above, a demand of excise duty to the tune of Rs. 6,25,000/- [under Rule 9 (2) of Central Excise Rule, 1944] was held to be a just demand by the adjudicating authority, namely, Additional Commissioner, Meerut vide its order dated 28.03.2004. It is this order which was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) and later upheld by the CESTAT. 4. Pursuant to the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad M/s Dinex Plywood (P) Ltd., Sitapur was amalgamated/merged with the respondent company i.e. M/s Janardhan Plywood Industries Ltd. 13, Gandhi Road, Dehradun. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the adjudicating authority has been set aside and later in appeal before the CESTAT the appeal has been dismissed, as already referred above. Hence, the present appeal. 8. A Division Bench of this Court has admitted the appeal on following substantial question of law:- "whether a manufacture after opting to pay full rate of duty in a financial year in terms of Para 2 (i) of the Notification No. 01/93-CE dated 28.02.1993 as amended, could avail the benefit of exemption under Para 1 of the said notification?" 9. Primarily, this Court has to see as to what extent the benefits of Notification No.1/93-CE dated 23.02.1993 as it stood amended on 01.03.1994 vide Notification No.59/94-CE can be availed by the respondent and whether the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ading of the above amendment, which was inserted in the early Notification 1/93-CE, appears to suggest that this was done as manufacturers were coming in and out of this exemption. They first used to opt for exemption in a financial year and thereafter for other clearances they opted out of the exemption. The extended meaning of the amendment which says "subject to the condition that such manufacturer shall pay duty at the rate applicable but aforesaid exemption on all subsequent clearances of specified goods made after availing such option, in a financial year in which such date of option falls," shows the real intention behind the amendment. 14. The Revenue asserts that it is the manufacturer who has chosen to keep out of the exemption, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on and another to keep out of it, the learned counsel would submit. These exemptions are for the benefit of small scale industries and, therefore, an interpretation should not come which should be detrimental to the small scale industries. He has taken us to almost every part of the notification including the amendment and has read out such provisions of the notification and thereafter has concluded that there is no bar in the notification which prohibits the respondent from exercising an option as it has chosen to do and the demand of the Revenue is totally unjustified and as it has been upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as CESTAT. 16. If we go through the Notification No. 1/93-CE and the amended Notification No.59/94-CE, the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regate value of unit 1 and 2. That being the only interpretation possible. 19. It is a possibility that in a given case the "aggregate value" of two or more units may exceeds two crores and, therefore, the manufacturer in order to get exemption may split its claim! One unit claiming exemption and the other refraining from claiming this exemption, so that, it can get benefit under the other excise schemes, such as MODVAT Credit, etc. The provision in the main Notification No.1/93-CE as well as the amended Notification No. 59/94 have been placed in order to check this abuse. It is for this reason that we find that once the respondent had exercised to keep out of the exemption for its Sitapur unit, it cannot claim benefit of the notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... struction or interpretation of statutes it is construed strictly either because of legislative intention or on economic justification of inequitable burden or progressive approach of fiscal provision intended to augment State revenue. But once exception or exemption becomes applicable no rule or principle requires it to be construed strictly. Truly speaking liberal and strict construction of an exemption provision are to be invoked at different stages of interpreting it. When the question is whether a subject falls in the notification or in the exemption clause then it being in nature of exception is to be construed strictly and against the subject but once ambiguity or doubt about applicability is lifted and the subject falls in the notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
