2013 (11) TMI 1190 - AT - Central Excise

Goods Cleared in DTA Cleared to 100% EOU without payment of duty - Waiver of pre-deposit Revenue was of the view that the goods was cleared to 100% EOU as such without any process of manufacture - Held that - Prima facie from the evidence ARE-3 it was found that the goods were cleared as such thus the applicant failed to make out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of entire amount of duty, interest and penalty - the applicant directed to deposit a sum of Rupees one lakh only as pre-deposit upon such submission rest of the duty to be waived till the disposal Partial stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
- Waiver of pre-deposit of duty
- Eligibility for exemption from payment of duty for goods cleared to 100% EOU

Waiver of Pre-deposit of Duty:
The applicant, engaged in the manufacture of Monosodium Glutamate, filed an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs.2,94,904/- along with interest and penalty. The issue revolved around the clearance of goods in the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) on payment of duty and to 100% Export Oriented Units (EOU) without payment of duty under a specific notification. The Revenue contended that the goods were cleared to 100% EOU without any process of manufacture, thus making them ineligible for exemption from duty payment. The advocate for the applicant argued that for a subsequent period, the Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside a similar adjudication order, and the process undertaken for clearance to 100% EOU was covered under chapter notes. The Tribunal, after examining the evidence, found that the goods were indeed cleared 'as such,' leading to the conclusion that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case for the waiver of the entire amount of duty, interest, and penalty.

Eligibility for Exemption from Payment of Duty for Goods Cleared to 100% EOU:
The crux of the issue lay in whether the goods cleared to 100% EOU were eligible for exemption from payment of duty. The advocate highlighted that the department had acknowledged duty payment and the process undertaken during clearance to DTA. However, the Revenue argued that the transaction involved in clearing goods to 100% EOU was considered 'as such sales,' pointing to the usage of ARE-3 Forms. The Tribunal, based on the evidence presented, observed that the goods were indeed cleared 'as such,' leading to the decision that the applicant did not establish a prima facie case for the waiver of the entire amount of duty, interest, and penalty. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit a specified sum within a stipulated timeframe.

In conclusion, the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI addressed the issues of waiver of pre-deposit of duty and eligibility for exemption from payment of duty for goods cleared to 100% EOU. The decision was based on a thorough examination of the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, ultimately leading to a directive for the applicant to deposit a specific amount within a specified period.