2011 (5) TMI 627 - AT - Central Excise

SSI benefit claim - Held that - Commissioner (Appeals) has already held that the product in question to be excisable and the appellants are entitled for SSI benefit - recovery of the amount in terms of the impugned orders from the appellants does not arise.

Summary

Issues:
1. Availability of relief sought by the appellants in the present proceedings.
2. Entitlement of the appellants for SSI benefit.
3. Disposal of the appeals based on previous order by Commissioner (Appeals).
4. Recovery of amount in terms of impugned orders.
5. Entitlement to raise points in case of Departmental appeal against previous order.

Analysis:
1. The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, DELHI, delivered by Shri Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, addressed the issue of the relief sought by the appellants in the present proceedings. It was noted that the relief sought had already been made available to the appellants by the Commissioner (Appeals) in an order dated 6.10.2005. The Commissioner had held the product in question to be excisable and the appellants entitled to SSI benefit. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that since the relief had already been granted in a previous order, the present proceedings could not continue.

2. The judgment also discussed the entitlement of the appellants for SSI benefit. It was highlighted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had already determined the appellants' entitlement to the benefit in the previous order dated 6.10.2005. As a result, the Tribunal emphasized that the appellants were entitled to the benefit as per the previous order, and any recovery would have to be in accordance with that order.

3. The Tribunal proceeded to dispose of the appeals based on the previous order by the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 6.10.2005. It was stated that both appeals were liable to be disposed of as infractuous, given that the relief sought had already been granted in the earlier order. The recovery, if any, was specified to be in terms of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in 2005.

4. Regarding the recovery of the amount in terms of the impugned orders, the judgment clarified that the recovery, if necessary, would have to be in accordance with the order dated 6.10.2005 by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellants were assured that any recovery would be subject to appeal, if any, against the said order by the Department.

5. Lastly, the judgment addressed the appellants' entitlement to raise points in case of any Departmental appeal against the previous order dated 6.10.2005. It was emphasized that in the event of a Departmental appeal against the said order, the appellants would be allowed to raise all points that were sought to be raised in the present appeals. The recovery, if required, would still be subject to the appeal process against the previous order by the Department.