Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2008 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2008 (9) TMI 667 - AT - Central Excise

Issues involved: Appeal against demand of duty, interest, and penalty based on availing SSI exemption for manufacturing units under Notification No. 16/97-C.E.

Summary:
1. The Commissioner (A) vacated the demand of duty, interest, and penalty against the appellant, M/s. Sagar Chlorate Pvt. Ltd. (SCPL), for allegedly availing SSI benefit for one unit and not for another unit, contrary to Notification No. 16/97-C.E.

2. The Commissioner (A) found no suppression of facts by SCPL, allowing their appeal based on Notification provisions and lack of deliberate evasion of duty. The exemption applied to total clearances from all units, not separately for each unit.

3. The Revenue appealed, claiming SCPL suppressed information about another factory availing SSI benefit, contrary to Circular F.No. 172/06/96-CX. The Commissioner (A) was criticized for allowing different duty rates for SCPL's units.

4. After hearing both sides, it was found that SCPL did not willfully suppress information about its units, and the Revenue failed to disprove this. No intention to evade duty was established, preventing the invocation of a larger period.

5. The Commissioner's analysis revealed SCPL was not obligated to disclose ownership of multiple units or their duty payment options. The appellant did not withhold information, as per Notification provisions, resulting in no duty short levy for the Salvarpatti unit.

6. The appeal was dismissed as there was no evidence of duty short levy or intentional suppression by SCPL. The impugned order was upheld, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected due to the lack of grounds for interference.

*(Operative part of the Order pronounced in Open Court on 26-9-2008)*

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates