2013 (7) TMI 1131 - HC - Central Excise

Whether the investment made by the assessee are in terms of the notifications 32/99-CE, 33/99-CE, 8/2004 and 28/2004 r/w Section 72 of the Finance Act, 2011? - HELD THAT - It is directed that an Investment Appraisal Committee constituted as per the earlier notification shall meet and decide latest by 31st October, 2013 whether the investment made by the assessee are in terms of the notifications referred to in our earlier order - In view of the detailed order passed by us the demand notice is kept in abeyance till the next date.

Summary

Issues involved:
Interpretation of the New Industrial Policy and concessions in the North-eastern region, validity of Notifications 32/99-CE, 33/99-CE, 8/2004, and 28/2004, refund of excise duty benefits, constitution of Investment Appraisal Committee, assessment of investments made by assessee, expiry of scheme on 31st December 2012, role of State and Central Government in verifying refunds, objections raised by Union of India, direction for Committee meeting by 31st October 2013.

Analysis:

The judgment by the High Court of Tripura on 7th May 2013 addressed the issue of the New Industrial Policy and concessions in the North-eastern region, specifically focusing on the refund of excise duty benefits under various Notifications. The Court highlighted the requirement for the Investment Appraisal Committee to verify whether the assessee utilized the refunded amount for the intended purposes outlined in the scheme. However, due to the absence of the State representative at a crucial meeting, the assessment could not be completed as mandated by the scheme.

In response to the Court's directive, the State approached the Central Board of Excise and Customs to constitute a Committee for assessing the investments made by the assessee. The Union of India objected, citing the expiration of the scheme on 31st December 2012 and the lack of statutory provisions for further assessment. Despite this objection, the Court emphasized the necessity of evaluating whether the investments aligned with the legal requirements, stating that such factual determinations are beyond the Court's jurisdiction.

The Court rejected the Union of India's objection and directed the continuation of the Investment Appraisal Committee's assessment process. It was emphasized that if the assessee complied with the notification requirements, they would be entitled to full benefits. Conversely, if discrepancies were found, both the State and Central Government would benefit. The Court set a deadline of 31st October 2013 for the Committee to conclude its assessment, ensuring that the interests of all stakeholders were safeguarded.

Overall, the judgment underscored the importance of upholding the terms of the scheme, facilitating a fair assessment of investments, and ensuring that both the assessee and the government entities receive their due benefits as per the legal framework established by the notifications.