2007 (5) TMI 504 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Excise duty demand based on alleged clearance without payment of duty; Rejection of appellant's contention regarding production under compound levy scheme; Dispute over disposal of specific quantities; Consideration of stock outstanding during transition to actual production levy; Remand for fresh determination.

In this case, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, NEW DELHI, addressed the issue of excise duty demand concerning the alleged clearance of over 200 MTs of M.S. Ingots without payment of duty. The authorities based their finding on a shortage noticed during stock taking on a specific date. The appellant contended that the quantity in question related to production under a compound levy scheme that had ended earlier, but this contention was rejected due to lack of proof regarding the disposal of the said quantity. The appellant's counsel argued that the appellant had transitioned back to actual production based levy and had been filing monthly returns, indicating the stock of ingots and runners and raisers. The counsel emphasized that since these quantities were duty paid under the compound levy scheme, their disposal should not be relevant to the current dispute. The authorities had not considered the details of disposal provided during the proceedings, citing procedural reasons.

The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument that the stock outstanding during the transition to actual production levy should not be considered for the current proceedings as the goods had been duty paid under the compound levy scheme. The Tribunal directed a verification of the factual position from relevant records and remitted the case back to the original authority for a fresh determination. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed by way of remand for further review and decision by the original authority.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision focused on clarifying the treatment of stock under the compound levy scheme, emphasizing the importance of verifying the factual position before making a determination on the excise duty demand. The case was remitted for a fresh assessment, highlighting the need for a comprehensive review considering the specific circumstances and evidence presented by the appellant.