2005 (10) TMI 397 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Admissibility of benefit of exemption from duty to Dichloroquinoline under Notification No. 35/91-C.E. during a specific period.

Detailed Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai concerned the admissibility of the benefit of exemption from duty to Dichloroquinoline (4.7 DEQ) falling under Chapter sub-heading No. 2942.00 as per Notification No. 35/91-C.E. dated 25th January, 1991 for the period from 6-1-95 to 26-3-95. The Assistant Commissioner had confirmed a demand against the Respondents and imposed a penalty on the assessee for late filing of classification claiming the benefit of the Notification. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order, emphasizing that despite the rescission of Notification No. 35/91-C.E., the goods continued to enjoy the exemption benefit, thereby rejecting the penalty imposed.

The Tribunal referred to a previous case, Surya Pharmaceutical Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III, where it was established that duty exemption is available to bulk drugs falling under specific chapters even after the repeal of the 1987 Drug Price Control Order. The Tribunal held that the benefit of exemption is admissible to the respondents up to 8th February, 1995, and thereafter until 26th March, 1995, as the subsequent Notification did not link the exemption benefit to the filing of a classification list. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the benefit of exemption from duty is applicable to the respondents during the specified period.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the impugned order and dismissed the appeal, affirming the admissibility of the benefit of exemption from duty to Dichloroquinoline for the period in question based on the provisions of relevant Notifications and legal precedents.