2004 (7) TMI 392 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of Central Excise Act regarding the classification of Pan Masala containing Tobacco, applicability of Notification 5/2001-C.E. for duty assessment, validity of a corrigendum as an amendment to the Notification, duty demand calculation, and relief due to the appellants.

Interpretation of Central Excise Act:
The appellants, engaged in manufacturing Pan Masala, disputed the duty assessment method for Pan Masala containing Tobacco under sub-heading 2404.49. The department insisted on duty payment based on MRP as per Notification 5/2001-C.E. The tribunal analyzed the validity of the introduction of sub-heading 2404.49 and concluded that the corrigendum effectively amended the Notification, thus having statutory force. The duty demand from 2-3-2001 to 31-3-2001 was upheld, while the demand for 1-3-2001 was set aside as unsustainable.

Applicability of Notification 5/2001-C.E.:
The dispute centered around whether the duty on Pan Masala containing Tobacco should be calculated based on the value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act or on MRP as per Notification 5/2001-C.E. The tribunal clarified that the corrigendum to the Notification, published in the gazette, effectively amended it, thereby making the duty calculation based on MRP valid from 2-3-2001 onwards.

Validity of a Corrigendum as an Amendment:
The tribunal rejected the appellants' argument that a mere corrigendum could not introduce sub-heading 2404.49. It held that the corrigendum, being duly published in the gazette, had statutory force and effectively amended the Notification. This decision supported the department's stance on duty calculation for Pan Masala containing Tobacco.

Duty Demand Calculation:
The tribunal sustained the duty demand from 2-3-2001 to 31-3-2001, aligning with the amended Notification's provisions for duty assessment on Pan Masala containing Tobacco. However, it set aside the demand for 1-3-2001, emphasizing that duty should be recomputed based on the amended Notification from 2-3-2001 onwards.

Relief Due to the Appellants:
In conclusion, the tribunal disposed of the appeal by upholding the duty demand for the relevant period based on the amended Notification. It directed the duty to be recomputed accordingly and granted consequential relief to the appellants in accordance with the law.