2009 (9) TMI 718 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of Notification No. 4/2006 and Notification No. 6/2006 for concessional duty rates.

Analysis:
The case involved the interpretation of Notification No. 4/2006 and Notification No. 6/2006 regarding the concessional duty rates applicable to the manufacturing of plain particle boards and pre-laminated particle boards. The applicant claimed eligibility for the concessional rate of duty under both notifications. The authorities below determined that the product manufactured by the applicant, made from sugarcane bagasse, formaline, and melamine, qualified for the concessional rate under Notification No. 4/2006. However, the applicant argued that the product also met the criteria under sub-serial No. 6 of serial No. 82 of Notification No. 6/2006, which exempted fully bagasse board.

The Tribunal acknowledged that the product could be considered as "bagasse board" and stated that the applicant had the right to choose the more beneficial Notification when multiple Notifications were applicable. Citing a precedent from the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Share Medical Care v. UOI, the Tribunal affirmed that if an applicant was entitled to benefits under two different Notifications, they could opt for the more advantageous one. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the applicant was eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 6/2006, and as a result, waived the pre-deposit of dues as per the impugned order and stayed the recovery pending the appeal's disposal.