2013 (10) TMI 1244 - AT - Central Excise

Payment of Duty Compounded Levy Scheme Waiver of Pre-deposit - Whether or not a manufacturer under the Rules has the option to pay duty under compounded levy only for the days he intend to run the machines for which intimation as prescribed are given to the department Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines - Held that - Relying upon M/s. Pm Products vs. CCE, Ahmedabad 2013 (10) TMI 1199 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - It is not necessary to pay the entire monthly duty first in a month before availing abatement assessee had made a prima facie case in their favour - complete waiver from confirmed dues and penalties are allowed in these appeals till their final disposal Stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
- Whether a manufacturer has the option to pay duty under compounded levy only for the days the machines are intended to run as per prescribed intimation.

Analysis:
The appellant filed stay applications against orders passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-II, raising the issue of whether a manufacturer under specific rules has the option to pay duty under compounded levy only for the days the machines are intended to run. The appellant's representatives argued that similar matters were stayed in a previous case and cited relevant case laws to support their position. On the other hand, the learned A.R. contended, referring to a CESTAT judgment, that duty must be paid for the entire month even if the machine operated for only a part of the month. The Tribunal considered the arguments and records, noting that a previous order by the same bench granted full waiver in a similar case. Therefore, the Tribunal found no reason to differentiate and granted a complete waiver from confirmed dues and penalties in the current appeals until final disposal.

This judgment revolves around the interpretation of rules regarding the payment of duty under compounded levy for specific periods of machine operation. The Tribunal considered past decisions and arguments presented by both parties to reach a decision on whether duty should be paid for the entire month or only for the days the machines are intended to run. The Tribunal's decision to grant a complete waiver in line with a previous order highlights consistency in approach and application of legal principles in similar cases. The judgment provides clarity on the application of rules in situations where machines operate for partial periods within a month, ensuring fairness and adherence to legal requirements.