Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 1999 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1999 (9) TMI 879 - AT - Central Excise

Issues: Application for dispensing with pre-deposit of duty and penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna.

The judgment revolves around an application seeking dispensation of the pre-deposit condition of duty and penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna. The dispute primarily concerns a quantity of molasses claimed to have been damaged due to flood waters in 1987. The Tribunal had earlier remanded the matter to the Commissioner for testing samples of the molasses to determine their fitness for marketing and consumption. The applicant argues that despite favorable test results, the adjudicating authority refused to rely on them, citing the test report's timing in 1998 for molasses manufactured in 1987. The Commissioner's decision to confirm the duty demand is challenged on the grounds of disregarding the test report and the Tribunal's remand directions.

The respondent contends that the applicants stored fresh molasses along with the old damaged ones in the same Kutcha Pit, clearing the mixture in subsequent years, implying that the earlier molasses were not damaged in 1989. The applicant clarifies that the fresh molasses stored separately were cleared, while the old damaged molasses remained in the pit. The clearance process is stated to be subject to Allotment Orders by State Excise Authorities and Molasses Controller, ensuring damaged molasses are not sold to buyers.

After considering both parties' arguments, the judge finds merit in the applicant's case. The Commissioner's decision to uphold the earlier order from 1994, which was set aside by the Tribunal in 1997, is deemed invalid. The Tribunal's remand effectively nullified the previous order, rendering it non-existent. Consequently, the judge rules in favor of the applicant, allowing the application based on the Commissioner's inability to uphold the defunct previous order.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates