TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 784X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 01.03.2006. As per the provisions of law, Revenue should have issued the appellant with a show cause notice calling upon them to show cause as to why they should not clear the goods at nil rate of duty applying the provisions at serial No. 47A ibid. Such proceedings would have given complete opportunity to the appellant to explain as to why the said serial number of the said notification was not applicable to the appellant. Without giving any opportunity to the appellant to present their defence on the contention of Revenue that the appellant should have cleared the goods availing full exemption, Revenue has unilaterally decided that the said serial number of the said notification was applicable to the appellant. These present proceedi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2008 and various other notifications amending the said Notification dated 01.03.2008 and was paying central excise duty. It was also stated that during the financial year 2010-11, appellant paid central excise duty of around Rs.10 lakhs on goods cleared for home consumption and paid around central excise duty of Rs.30 lakhs on goods exported under claim of rebate. It was contended by Revenue in the said show cause notice that the appellant was eligible for clearing the goods at nil rate of duty at serial No. 47A of Notification No.04/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006, but the appellant deliberately paid the duty. It was also contended that, as provided under sub-section (1A) of Section 5A of Central Excise Act, it was mandatory for the appellant to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore, the question of applicability of serial No. 47A of the said notification to the goods manufactured by the appellant does not arise. He has further submitted that Revenue has unilaterally decided that the appellant was not eligible to avail the benefit of Notification No.02/2008-CE dated 01.03.2008 and unilaterally decided that the goods manufactured by the appellant should have attracted nil rate of duty and with this presumption they have raised the demand for recovery of cenvat credit. He has further submitted that after payment of central excise duty and on export of goods, appellant was allowed a rebate of Rs.51,05,099/- for the period from 2008-09 to 2011- 12 during the relevant period and through show cause notice dated 31 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial No. 47A of Notification No. 04/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006. As per the provisions of law, Revenue should have issued the appellant with a show cause notice calling upon them to show cause as to why they should not clear the goods at nil rate of duty applying the provisions at serial No. 47A ibid. Such proceedings would have given complete opportunity to the appellant to explain as to why the said serial number of the said notification was not applicable to the appellant. Without giving any opportunity to the appellant to present their defence on the contention of Revenue that the appellant should have cleared the goods availing full exemption, Revenue has unilaterally decided that the said serial number of the said notification was applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
