2007 (4) TMI 505 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Interpretation of Notification No. 16/2001-CE for exemption to cement supplied for Earthquake relief work.

Summary:

Issue 1: Interpretation of time period for producing certificates

The appellant was denied the benefit of the exemption under Notification No. 16/2001-CE due to not producing the required certificates within the specified time frame. The appellant argued that the certificates were obtained later and submitted to the authorities. However, the benefit was still denied as the certificates were not produced within the extended period granted by the Assistant Commissioner.

Judgment:
After analyzing the relevant condition in the notification, it was found that the Assistant Commissioner has the authority to extend the time period for producing certificates. The lower authorities incorrectly interpreted the provision as limiting the Assistant Commissioner's power to extend the period by only three months. The judgment clarified that the Assistant Commissioner's power for extension is not restricted to three months and is unlimited. Therefore, the certificates obtained by the appellant, even after the prescribed period, should have been considered by the authorities.

Issue 2: Consideration of certificates for earthquake relief work

Since the Notification pertained to exemption for 'earthquake hit areas' and relief work, the certificates obtained by the appellant, albeit late, should have been taken into account by the authorities. The judgment set aside the previous order and remanded the case to the original adjudicating authority for reevaluation based on the submitted certificate, directing them to grant the refund accordingly.

Conclusion:
Both appeals were allowed by way of remand, emphasizing the importance of considering certificates obtained for earthquake relief work even if submitted after the initial time frame.