2012 (11) TMI 724 - AT - Central Excise

Waiver of the pre-deposit - denial of exemption Notification No. 75/84 Notification No. 75/84 is for kerosene which is used as an illuminant in oil burning lamps Held that - Notification No. 75/84 under tariff heading exempts the goods falling under Chapter 22, 27 or 29 is subject to the condition enumerated in the said notification - serial No. 52 of the said notification, the product described is kerosene of Chapter 27 as partially exempted and there are no conditions attached to that - product manufactured by the appellants fall under Chapter 2710.29 which would prima facie get covered under the said notification at least for the purpose of stay - appellants have made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of the pre-deposit

Summary

Issues:
1. Stay petition for waiver of the amount involved confirmed by the adjudicating authority.
2. Denial of exemption under Notification No. 75/84 for the appellant's products.
3. Interpretation of the tariff heading and classification of the appellant's products.
4. Prima facie case for complete waiver of the pre-deposit amount involved.

Analysis:

1. The stay petition was filed by the assessee seeking a waiver of the amount confirmed by the adjudicating authority in relation to 14 show cause notices. The appellant's request was for the exemption of the said amount.

2. The dispute revolved around the denial of exemption under Notification No. 75/84 for the products manufactured by the appellant. The appellant argued that their products, Linear Alkyl Benzene Feed Stock and Low Aluminium Rolling Oil, fell under Chapter Heading 2710.29 and should be covered by the exemption. The lower authority had denied the benefit of the notification on the grounds that the products were not ordinarily used as an illuminant in oil burning lamps.

3. The interpretation of the tariff heading and classification of the appellant's products was a key point of contention. The appellant claimed that their products should be considered under the exemption as they corresponded to the description in the notification. The appellant relied on a previous decision by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal to support their argument regarding the exhaustive nature of the tariff heading.

4. After hearing arguments from both sides and reviewing the records, the Tribunal found that the products manufactured by the appellant fell under Chapter 2710.29, which could prima facie be covered under the exemption notification. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant had made out a prima facie case for a complete waiver of the pre-deposit amount involved. Consequently, the Tribunal granted the waiver and stayed the recovery of the amount until the appeal was disposed of.