Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s Entex Pvt. Ltd., Customs, Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal

2015 (9) TMI 827 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Duty demand - Abatement under Rule 96ZQ(7) (e) of Central Excise Rules, 1994 - Held that:- In the decision reported in [2001 (12) TMI 95 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS], in the case of Beauty Dyers vs. Union of India, this Court has held that Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998; Rules framed under Notification Nos. 14/2000-C.E. (N.T.) and 19/2000-C.E. and Notification No. 2/99-C.E. are ultra vires of erstwhile Section 3A of the Central E .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed:- 26-6-2015 - R. Sudhakar And K. B. K. Vasuki, JJ. For the Petitioner : Ms. P. Mahadevan For the Respondent : Ms S. Jaikumar JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. Sudhakar, J.) These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed by the Revenue as against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue being aggrieved by the dropping of demands of duty in favour of the assessee for the material periods (June, 1999 to Marc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and 2. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the 2nd repspondent Tribunal has further erred in law in holding that a revenue neutral situation is discernible in this case without taking into consideration the mandatory penalty prescribed under Rule 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules, 1944? ' 2. The brief facts of the assessee's case are as follows: ''The assessee is an independent processor engaged in the manufacture of processed textile fabrics falling under Chapte .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

her show cause notice dated 5.5.2000 was issued for the period from 1.12.1999 to 31.3.2000. After due process of law, the Order-in-Original came to be passed demanding a sum of ₹ 2,73,226/- from the assessee under Rule 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11 A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The statutory interest of a sum of ₹ 1,64,739/- under Rule 96ZQ (5) (i) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was also demanded from the assessee. Along with these demands, a tot .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

we are of the considered view that, as the provisions of Section 3 A of the Act remained the same, prior to and after 28.02.1999, the Board's circular has got to be examined in the light of the said provisions. Sub-section (3) of Section 3 A provided for levy and collection of duty of excise on notified goods. Its proviso provided for abatement of duty for any continuous period of closure of factory of not less than 7 days subject to fulfilment of such conditions as might be prescribed. Thes .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ty first and then claim abatement. We do not find any reason why this liberal approach suggested by the Board should be resisted by the department. Yet another reason which we have found in favour of the respondents is that it is not the case of the Revenue that the abatement claims in question would have been rejected for any reason whatsoever, had they been filed after payment of duty. In other words, a revenue-neutral situation is discernible from the facts of this case. For the aforesaid rea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in 2004 (166) E.L.T. 27 (Mad.), in the case of Beauty Dyers vs. Union of India, this Court has held that Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998; Rules framed under Notification Nos. 14/2000-C.E. (N.T.) and 19/2000-C.E. and Notification No. 2/99-C.E. are ultra vires of erstwhile Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The relevant paragraphs of the order reads as under: "13. As rightly submitted by learned counsel all chambers irrespecti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version