Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2008 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (9) TMI 722 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Appeal against dropping of duty demand by lower appellate authority. 2. Determination of aggregate value of clearances for SSI benefit eligibility. 3. Validity of evidence regarding clandestine manufacture and removal of goods. Analysis: 1. The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal concerned the dropping of a duty demand of Rs. 5,73,653/- by the lower appellate authority, which had been confirmed against the respondents by the original authority. The Tribunal's remand order required de novo adjudication on whether the respondents exceeded the maximum limit under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. for the years 1993-94 and 94-95. The original authority found the aggregate value of clearances exceeded the limit, denying SSI benefit. However, the appellate authority, after excluding quantities of parts of 'wet grinders,' found the aggregate value within the limit, granting SSI benefit and setting aside the duty demand. 2. The Revenue's appeal contended that the presence of spares and parts of wet grinders in the factory indicated clandestine manufacture and removal, challenging the lower appellate authority's decision. The Tribunal noted this argument did not invalidate the appellate Commissioner's correction of the quantification error in the aggregate value of clearances, based on worksheets submitted by the assessee. The Revenue's appeal did not dispute the reliability of these worksheets, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal against the lower appellate authority's decision. 3. The Tribunal, after thorough consideration, dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the lower appellate authority's decision to grant SSI benefit to the assessee based on corrected calculations of the aggregate value of clearances. The Tribunal's judgment was pronounced in open court on 23-9-2008, upholding the lower appellate authority's decision and rejecting the Revenue's challenge regarding the alleged clandestine manufacture and removal of goods.
|