2002 (5) TMI 728 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Benefit of Notification 175/86 denied by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs.
2. Conversion of provisional SSI registration certificate into a permanent one for availing exemption.
3. Interpretation of Paragraph 4 of Notification 175/86.
4. Validity of provisional registration for claiming duty concession.
5. Applicability of Trade Notice 26/87 in the case.

Issue 1:
The appeal was filed against the decision of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Vadodara, who denied the benefit of Notification 175/86 claimed by the appellant, a manufacturer of machinery equipments and structures. The denial was based on the failure to convert the provisional SSI registration certificate into a permanent one, a requirement for availing the exemption.

Issue 2:
The appellant contended that the existence of the provisional registration under the Industrial Development Regulation Act was not disputed. They argued that as per Paragraph 4 of Notification 175/86, they were entitled to claim the benefit. The appellant referred to Trade Notice 26/87 and cited legal precedents to support their claim, while the Departmental Representative reiterated the findings of the lower authority.

Issue 3:
To claim the benefit of Notification 175/86, Paragraph 4 required the factory to be registered as a small-scale industry with the Director of Industries. Although provisional certificates recognizing the appellant as a small-scale industry were issued, there was no evidence of converting the provisional certificate into a permanent one, which was a crucial requirement for availing the exemption.

Issue 4:
The Trade Notice 26/87 issued by the Bombay-I Collectorate stated that provisional registration from State Government authorities could be accepted for duty concession under Notification 175/86 after verification. Since the department did not dispute the validity of the provisional certificate issued by appropriate authorities, the Tribunal accepted the appellant's case based on the trade notice.

Issue 5:
Considering the arguments and the trade notice, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, providing consequential relief as per the law. The appellant's entitlement to the benefit of Notification 175/86 was upheld based on the acceptance of the provisional registration for claiming duty concession, as supported by the Trade Notice 26/87.