2015 (10) TMI 1105 - HC - Central Excise

Determination of annual capacity of production - manufacture of Pan Masala - Held that - Rule 5 of the PMPM Rules only distinguishes between a single track and multiple track machines and the duty is paid accordingly. Duty is not paid on the basis of number of pouches produced per minute per month. As per the notification dated 1.7.2008, the rate of duty has been fixed per packing machine per month and not on the turnover of the pouches manufactured. The Central Excise and Customs Board has also issued a circular dated 24.1.2014 clarifying that the duty payable under the notification dated 1.7.2008 is determined on deemed production with respect to the number of operating packing machines in the factory and not on the basis of the actual production by a unit. - In the light of the specific finding given by the Tribunal, being the last fact finding authority, to the effect that the machine purchased by the assessee is a single track machine, the duty payable by the assessee on the basis of a single track machine, should have been levied. The Commissioner fell in error in treating the said machine as a two track machine. The order of the Commissioner was rightly set aside by the Tribunal. - no substantial question of law arises for consideration - Decided against Revenue.

Issues:
1. Determination of machine capacity under Pan Masala Packing Machine Rules.
2. Classification of machine as single track or double track.
3. Assessment of excise duty based on machine capacity.
4. Interpretation of Central Excise Act provisions and relevant Rules.

Issue 1: Determination of machine capacity under Pan Masala Packing Machine Rules:
The case involved M/s Dharam Pal Satyapal Pvt. Ltd., engaged in Pan Masala manufacturing, disputing the capacity determination of their packing machine. The company declared the machine as a Single Track Machine producing 150 pouches per minute, approved by the Jurisdictional Commissioner. The Central Excise Officer later claimed it to be a Double Track Machine, resulting in a show cause notice and penalty imposition.

Issue 2: Classification of machine as single track or double track:
The dispute centered on whether the machine in question was a single track or double track machine under the Pan Masala Packing Machine Rules. The Commissioner assessed it as a double track machine based on the production capacity observed during an inspection. However, the Tribunal concluded that the machine was a single track machine, as it only had one track where pouches were formed and filled, albeit with a unique feature allowing higher production speed.

Issue 3: Assessment of excise duty based on machine capacity:
The excise duty assessment was challenged based on the machine's classification as a single or double track. The duty payment was determined per packing machine per month, not based on the number of pouches produced. The Tribunal emphasized that duty payment is differentiated between single and multiple track machines, with a circular clarifying that duty is based on deemed production per operating packing machine in the factory.

Issue 4: Interpretation of Central Excise Act provisions and relevant Rules:
The Court analyzed Section 3-A of the Central Excise Act, which empowers the Central Government to notify excisable goods and make rules for their assessment. The Pan Masala Packing Machine Rules were crucial in determining the deemed production per operating packing machine. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that the machine in question was a single track machine, not a double track as assessed by the Commissioner, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

In conclusion, the Court found no substantial question of law for consideration and upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the correct classification of the machine as a single track for excise duty assessment purposes.

← Previous Next →