9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 201 - AT - Service TaxStay application - Eligibility of benefit of Serial No. 90/93 of the Notification No. 4/2006-C.E., dated 1-3-2006 - Discharge of duty liability at the rate of 8% on the paper and paper board manufactured by the appellant - Held that - appellant has availed the benefit of Serial No. 93 of the notification, which talks about discharge of duty liability at the rate of 8% on the paper and paper board manufactured by the appellant. It is undisputed that the appellant is covered under serial No. 93 - On perusal of the said notification, we are of the considered view that appellant cannot be, prima facie, denied to benefit of discharging-reduced rate of excise duty as per Sl. No. 93 of the Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. - appellant has made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of amounts involved. Accordingly, the application for the waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved is allowed and recovery thereof stayed till the disposal of appeal - Stay granted.
Issues:
- Eligibility for benefit under Serial No. 90/93 of Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. Analysis: The judgment pertains to a stay petition filed for the waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty under Rule 15(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The main issue in this case revolves around the eligibility of the appellant for the benefit of Serial No. 90/93 of Notification No. 4/2006-C.E., dated 1-3-2006, as amended from time to time. Upon reviewing the records, it was observed that the appellant had availed the benefit of Serial No. 93 of the notification, which pertains to the discharge of duty liability at a reduced rate on paper and paper board manufactured by the appellant. The appellant is undeniably covered under Serial No. 93. However, the Revenue contended that the appellant should avail the benefit of Serial No. 90, which provides an exemption for the first clearance of 3500 MT of paper and paper board. After careful examination of the notification, the tribunal concluded that the appellant should not be denied the benefit of discharging duty at a reduced rate under Serial No. 93. Based on the above analysis, the tribunal found that the appellant had established a prima facie case for the waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved. Consequently, the application for the waiver was allowed, and the recovery of the amounts stayed until the appeal is disposed of. The registry was instructed to connect this appeal with another related appeal for further proceedings. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in the court by the judges, Shri M.V. Ravindran and B.S.V. Murthy.
|
