2013 (12) TMI 579 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of Goods Denial of Benefit of concessional rate of duty under Notification No.4/2006 - Waiver of Pre-deposit Held that - Duty amount to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund under Section 12C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in terms of Section 11D of the said Act Following Akshara Papers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem 2013 (11) TMI 1014 - CESTAT CHENNAI Unconditional stay granted - the applicants have paid the amount as duty which has already been credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund Pre-deposit of duty and penalty waived till the disposal stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
- Waiver of pre-deposit of duty in Appeal No. E/40005/2013 and E/40013/2013
- Benefit of concessional rate of duty under Notification No.4/2006
- Denial of exemption benefit under Notification No.4/2006
- Crediting amounts paid as duty to the Consumer Welfare Fund
- Grant of unconditional stay in similar cases
- Stay of recovery during pendency of appeals

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, delivered by P.K. Das, addresses the issue of waiver of pre-deposit of duty in two appeals, namely E/40005/2013 and E/40013/2013. The applicants, manufacturers of uncoated kraft paper, had availed the concessional rate of duty under Notification No.4/2006. However, a show-cause notice was issued to deny this exemption benefit, claiming that they should have availed the nil rate of duty under the same notification. The adjudicating authority ordered the amounts paid as duty to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund under the Central Excise Act, 1944. Additionally, irregular credit availed by the applicants was demanded along with interest and an equal amount of penalty.

In a significant reference to a previous case, the judgment notes that in the case of Akshara Papers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem, the Bench had granted unconditional stay on a similar issue. It is highlighted that the applicants in the present case had already paid the duty amount, which had been credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund. Consequently, the Tribunal granted waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest, and penalty in both cases, staying the recovery during the appeals' pendency. This decision aligns with the principle of fairness and consistency in the application of tax laws, ensuring that undue financial burden is not imposed on the appellants during the legal process.

The judgment underscores the importance of upholding the rights of the appellants while balancing the interests of revenue collection. By granting the waiver of pre-deposit and staying the recovery, the Tribunal acknowledges the need for a fair and just resolution of the dispute, allowing the appellants to contest the denial of exemption benefit without facing immediate financial repercussions. This approach reflects the Tribunal's commitment to ensuring a transparent and equitable adjudication process in matters concerning duty exemptions and compliance with the Central Excise Act, 1944.