Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (7) TMI 1204 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (7) TMI 1204 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2016 (340) E.L.T. 235 (Tri. - Del.) - SSI exemption - extended period of limitation - eligibility to avail benefit of Notification No.9/03-CE dated 01.03.2003 - the aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods for home consumption from its two units during 2003-04 had exceeded ₹ 300 Lakhs. - Held that:- if it is not open to the superior court to either add or substitute words in a statute, such right cannot be available to a statutory Tribunal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r No. 52496/2016 - Dated:- 20-7-2016 - S. K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) And R. K. Singh, Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Mr. B. L. Narasimhan, Advocate For the Respondent : Ms. Kanu Verma Kumar, D.R ORDER Per R. K. Singh Appeal has been filed against order in appeal dated 11.02.2008 which upheld the demand of ₹ 4,89,600/- alongwith interest and penalties on the ground that the appellant availed of the benefit of SSI exemption Notification No.9/03-CE dated 01.03.2003 although the cle .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

377; 300 Lakhs. The ld. Advocate, however, contended that the demand was time barred inasmuch as, the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal period of one year and there was no misstatement or suppression of facts as is evident from the fact that (i) the appellant had submitted a declaration in terms of para 2 (ii) of the said Notification which only required, interalia, the declaration of value of clearances of specified goods and the goods (beedies) manufactured by one of its units, we .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e goods for home consumption for its (two) factories during the preceding financial year should not have exceeded ₹ 300 Lakhs, and therefore, it cannot be held to be guilty of suppression of facts. It cited the judgment of CESTAT in the case of Nova Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh - 2015 (327) ELT 103 (Tri.-Del.). to assert that when the activities of the appellant were in the knowledge of the Department as both of the units were registered within the sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the clearances of all excisable goods for home consumption from both the units of the appellant during the period 2003-04 exceeded ₹ 300 Lakhs, it was not eligible for the benefit of Notification No.9/2003-CE as the said Notification clearly, interalia, stipulates that the exemption contained therein shall not be available, if the aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods for home consumption from one or more factories by a manufacturer exceeded ₹ 300 Lakhs in the precedin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me and address of the manufacturer; (b) location/locations of factory/ factories; (c) description of inputs used in manufacture of specified goods; (d) description of specified goods produced; (e) date from which option under this notification has been exercised; (f) aggregate value of clearances of specified goods (excluding the value of clearances referred to in para 3 of this Notification) till the dater of exercising the option; 6. The ld. Advocate pleaded that what was required to be declar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t claimed the exemption under Notification No.9/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003. It is, therefore, obvious that it was aware of the contents of the said Notification. The fact that it did submit the declaration as per para 2 (ii) of the said Notification further establishes that the appellant had read the Notification. It can be nobody s case that the appellant read the Notification only up to para 2 (ii) and did not read para 2 (vi) of the Notification. Thus, the contention that there is nothing to sh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e that beedies are excisable goods. In these circumstances the allegation in the show cause notice that while claiming the said exemption and filing Central Excise ER-I returns, it suppressed the fact of clearances of excisable goods for home consumption by its other unit with a view to evade central excise duty is clearly sustainable. Regarding the contention that both the units were registered under the same range/ division, and therefore, it was very much in the knowledge of the Department an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version