2015 (10) TMI 1165 - AT - Central Excise

Duty demand - exemption benefit under Notification 23/2003-CE dated 31.3.2003 - violation of conditions of exemption notification - Held that - Appellant submitted copy of Advance Licence duly debited by the Central Excise officers. Appellant had cleared the goods against Advance licence and contention of the learned Advocate is that appellant produced copy of the Advance Licence and the original is lying with M/s. Gujarat Flurochemicals Limited and the department may verify at their end. We find force in the submission of the learned Advocate. In our considered view as the appellant produced copy of the Advance Licence duly debited the quantity and value of the goods cleared by them and it would be proper that the jurisdictional Central Excise officer should verify at their end. - Impugned order is set aside - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appellant cleared goods under exemption benefit but faced demand of Central Excise duty.
2. Discrepancy in producing original Advance Licence debited by Central Excise officers.
3. Appellant's submission of copy of Advance Licence and need for verification.

Analysis:
1. The case involved an appellant, a 100% EOU manufacturing Disposable Gas Cylinders, who cleared final products to a buyer against advance Licence/Advance Release Orders, availing exemption under Notification 23/2003-CE. A show cause notice was issued for duty demand, interest, and penalty due to alleged violation of exemption conditions. Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and penalty.

2. The appellant argued that the notice was based on clearing goods in DTA without paying Central Excise duty under Advance Licence as per Foreign Trade Policy until an amendment requiring Advance Release Order. The issue arose as the appellant failed to produce the original Advance Licence specifying cleared goods' details. The Advocate presented a copy of the Advance Licence debited by the Central Excise officer, indicating compliance.

3. The Revenue's representative highlighted the absence of the original Advance Licence with debited details, a condition for exemption. The Tribunal noted the appellant's submission of a debited copy, suggesting the original was with the buyer. Upon review, the Tribunal found merit in the Advocate's argument, directing the jurisdictional officer to verify the original Licence at the buyer's end.

4. Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the order, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication. Emphasizing the need for verifying the Advance Licence at the buyer's end if necessary, the Tribunal instructed cooperation from the Advocate during the re-evaluation. The adjudicating authority was instructed to provide a fair hearing before issuing a new order.

5. The appeal was allowed for remand, ensuring a thorough examination of the Advance Licence for accurate decision-making. The judgment highlighted the importance of proper verification and cooperation in the process, safeguarding the appellant's rights during the proceedings.