TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 934X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the term “unit” used in the said notification refers to the said “factory”. The original authority records that it does not matter for Central Excise purposes as to by which name – whether by name of plant, unit or the like, each set is described. Since each unit cannot be described as a factory, he proceeded to hold that the whole premises should be considered as single entity and exemption was accordingly denied. The CBEC vide their letter dated 21.03.2006 addressed to Secretary (Industrial Development), Government of Uttaranchal clarified that in case of a manufacturer, producing motor vehicles, if a new assembly line/ production line is installed after 31.03.2007, then the benefit of said notification would not be available to motor vehicles manufactured on such assembly/production line. In various decisions, the Tribunal held that terms “unit” and “factory” cannot be accorded the same meaning for the purpose of Notification No.50/03. A notification grants exemption to new industrial units or existing industrial units undertaking substantial expansion. The exemption is not with reference to a factory. This is clear from the wordings of the notification. We also agree tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n respect of some other products. Holding that the main appellant is not eligible for exemption under the said notification as it was considered that only one factory was in existence, proceedings were initiated against the main appellant, partner of the main appellant and certain officials of the main appellant. 3. The demand-cum-SCN dated 07.04.2014 proposed denial of exemption to the main appellant along with proposal to impose penalties on all the noticees under various provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944 under the Rules, 2002. The case was adjudicated by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Dehradun resulting in the impugning order. The Commissioner held that the main appellant is not eligible for exemption under notification No.50/2003-CE and confirmed Central Excise demand of ₹ 3,45,87,178/-. He imposed equal amount of penalty on the main appellant in terms of Section 11AC of the Act. Further penalties of various amounts were imposed on the partner and officials of the main appellant under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 4. The ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants contested the findings in the impugning order. He submitted elaborately on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... different locations/premises, the justification given vide letter dated 07.!2.2011 is questionable. Vide letter dt. 07.12.2001, Appellants submitted that products manufactured are separate and distinct and both units have separate manufacturing facilities, labour etc. Further, two units are not retrained from simultaneously availing benefit under Rule 18/19 of the Excise Rules and Notification No.50/2003. There is no legal bar in having more than one unit in the same factory. 5.7, 5.8 5.11, 15.14, 15.5, 15.7 15.18 If the provisions of the Excise Act and Rules are read harmoniously, it would appear that wherever the word unit has been used in any of the provisions of the Excise Act or Rule made thereunder, the same refers to factory in which excisable goods are manufactured, therefore, exemption has to be extended to excisable goods manufactured in the factory located in any of the specified areas. Arguments of Ld. Commissioner are without legal basis. Detailed submissions made above regarding having two units in the same factory are relied again at this point. 5.52 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5.35 Ld. Commissioner has held that before granting registration, no physical verification was carried out and registration certificate was granted on the basis of declaration made by the Appellant in the application for registration. Department had acknowledged the declaration along with revised site plan wherein, presence of Unit-I and Unit-II was evident. Post verification of the Appellant s premises conducted when Range Officer Shri V.K. Bhatnagar and Sector Officer, Shri B.S. Bisht visited the factory premises of the Appellant for post registration verification. 5. The ld. AR submitted that impugning order examined the full factual background and location of the manufacturing facility of the appellant, as declared by the appellants. The appellants had only one factory with no clear demarcation of two different units. They have common registration with DIC, Sales Tax, Service Tax, Pollution Control Authorities, common electricity connection and generator facilities. The work force of the entire factory is commonly dealt with for labour law, ESI, etc. There is no unit-wise recognition by any authority and as such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tification when read together will clearly reveal that different terms are used in different contexts and summary conclusion based on inference and presumption as made by the original authority is not supported. 8. The CBEC vide their letter dated 21.03.2006 addressed to Secretary (Industrial Development), Government of Uttaranchal clarified that in case of a manufacturer, producing motor vehicles, if a new assembly line/ production line is installed after 31.03.2007, then the benefit of said notification would not be available to motor vehicles manufactured on such assembly/production line. Similarly, if the commercial production of a particular kind of specified goods has not commenced before 31.03.2007, the benefit of the said notification would not be available to such goods. We note that the said clarification brings-out that the exemption is to be applied even to a new assembling line which in any case will be part of an already existing factory having other manufacturing unit/facility. 9. The Tribunal while examining the application of exemption under the above said notification in the case of M/s Tirupati LPG Industries Ltd, 2015 (324) ELT 201 (Tri.-Del.) relying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
