2012 (7) TMI 169 - AT - Central Excise

SSI Exemption available under Notification No.8/2002 - ineligibility contended on ground that clearance value of the electricity pole manufactured by all of the units at UPSEB was liable to be clubbed together as per Notification - appellant being a manufacturing unit, owned and controlled by the UPSEB, having other manufacturing units located in the State of U.P. - Held that - Explanation (E) of said Notification states that where the specified goods are manufactured in a factory belonging to or maintained by the Central Government or by a State Government, or by a State Industries Corporation, or by a State Small Industries Corporation or by the Khadi and Village Industries Commission, then the value of excisable goods cleared from such factory alone shall be taken into account. Since, respondent is a manufacturing unit owned and controlled by the State Government, hence respondent is squarely covered under Explanation (E) to the above referred Notifications - Decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Whether the respondent is entitled to exemption under the notifications in question.

Analysis:
1. Facts and Background: The case involved two appeals by the Revenue against orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the eligibility of a manufacturing unit for exemption under specific notifications related to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

2. Contention by the Department: The Department argued that the manufacturing unit, owned and controlled by an autonomous body (UPSEB), was not eligible for the exemption under the notifications as it was not considered a factory belonging to or maintained by the State Government. The Department relied on a previous judgment to support this contention.

3. Contention by the Respondent: The Respondent, represented by an advocate, contended that the judgment cited by the Revenue was not directly applicable to the case due to differences in the language of the relevant notifications.

4. Examination of Notifications: The Tribunal examined the language of the notifications in question, particularly the Explanation (E) which specified the conditions for availing the exemption. The provision stated that the benefit would be available to a manufacturing unit owned or maintained by the Central or State Government.

5. Decision: Upon reviewing the evidence, including a Gazette Notification declaring the respondent as a Government company, the Tribunal concluded that the manufacturing unit was indeed owned and controlled by the State Government. Therefore, the respondent was entitled to the exemption under the notifications. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key arguments presented by both parties, the interpretation of the relevant legal provisions, and the ultimate decision reached by the Tribunal in favor of the respondent's eligibility for the exemption under the notifications.