Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (3) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (3) TMI 640 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
- Denial of benefit under Notification dated 10.06.2003
- Commencement of commercial production before 31.03.2010
- Allegations of improper inquiry by the department

Denial of Benefit under Notification dated 10.06.2003:
The case involved the appellant, engaged in manufacturing helmets falling under Chapter 65 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, who applied for exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE dated 10.06.2003. The department alleged that no capital goods were installed except one compressor, leading to the denial of the benefit. Show Cause proceedings were initiated, resulting in confirmed Central Excise duty recovery, interest, and penalties. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand, prompting the appeal before the Tribunal.

Commencement of Commercial Production before 31.03.2010:
The appellant contended that commercial production started on 26.03.2010, supported by evidence such as invoices, consignment notes, and VAT returns filed before the authorities. The department's doubt regarding the movement of capital goods in September 2010 was clarified, stating the movement occurred in March 2010. The Tribunal found that the production indeed began on 26.03.2010, making the appellant eligible for the exemption under the Notification dated 10.06.2003. It criticized the department for not following proper procedures during verification and concluded that the department's inquiry was flawed.

Allegations of Improper Inquiry by the Department:
The Tribunal observed that the department failed to conduct a proper inquiry to conclude that the appellant was not entitled to the exemption. Evidence submitted by the appellant, including the commencement of commercial production and VAT-paid clearances before 31.03.2010, supported their claim. The Tribunal found the department's inquiry lacking and the impugned order to be passed in a presumptive and summary manner. Consequently, the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellant, highlighting the inadequacies in the department's investigation and the appellant's compliance with the conditions for exemption.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates