2017 (1) TMI 1356 - AT - Central Excise

Levy of penalty - exemption claimed on the ground that the goods were meant for use in the public interest-water treatment project - Held that - the appellant believed on the public authority s certificate levy of penalty of ₹ 10,000/- under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 is unwarranted. Accordingly, confirming the duty element, penalty is waived - appeal partly allowed. SSI exemption - whether the goods are duty paid goods and is eligible for exemption? - Held that - When appellant did not avail any exemption relating to the water project due to withdrawal of the certificate by the Collector, appellant s case falls under Sl.No.1 of the Table appended to the Notification No.8/2003-CE dt. 1.3.2003 - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appellant's liability for penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002.
2. Treatment of duty-paid goods for the period June 2004 to March 2005 and eligibility for SSI exemption benefit.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Appellant's liability for penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002
The appellant initially claimed Excise Duty exemption based on a certificate from the Collector for goods intended for a water treatment project in the public interest. However, when the Collector withdrew the certificate, the appellant voluntarily paid the duty liability. The Revenue did not dispute this payment. The appellant argued that since they relied on the Collector's certificate in good faith, imposing a penalty of ?10,000 under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 would be unwarranted. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, stating that the penalty was not justified in this case, and waived the penalty while confirming the duty liability. The appeal was allowed on this ground.

Issue 2: Treatment of duty-paid goods for the period June 2004 to March 2005 and eligibility for SSI exemption benefit
In another appeal, the appellant contended that the goods for which duty liability of ?30,71,200 was discharged should be considered as duty-paid goods for the period June 2004 to March 2005. The appellant argued that these goods should be excluded from the computation of clearances to avail SSI exemption benefit for the financial year 2004-05. The appellant relied on Notification No.8/2003-CE and a decision in Shroff Engineering Ltd. Vs CCE Vadodara to support their case. The Revenue claimed that the appellant was not eligible for exemption on the clearances made to the water treatment project. The Tribunal found that since the appellant did not avail any exemption due to the withdrawal of the Collector's certificate, the goods fell under the provisions of Notification No.8/2003-CE. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant on both issues, waiving the penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and allowing the treatment of duty-paid goods for the relevant period to avail SSI exemption benefit. The decision highlighted the importance of good faith reliance on public authority certificates and the specific provisions of the relevant notifications in determining duty liability and exemption eligibility.