2017 (6) TMI 528 - AT - Central Excise

Area Based Exemption - N/N. 50/03-CE dated 10.6.2003 - denial on the ground that in column (d) of the declaration, the description of specified goods was not mentioned and only sub-heading 3304 was mentioned - Held that - as per N/N. 50/03-CE, the assessee has not filed declaration before first clearance of the said specified goods. Admittedly, there is no evidence that the appellant has filed the said declaration. In that circumstance, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly denied the benefit of exemption N/N. 50/03-CE except the goods falling under chapter heading 3304 - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Exemption under Notification No.50/03-CE for goods manufactured by the assessee - Eligibility criteria for exemption on specific goods - Filing of declaration with accurate description of goods - Denial of exemption for goods falling under Chapter 3307 - Lack of evidence for filing a subsequent declaration - Admissibility of exemption for goods under Chapter heading 3304.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the eligibility of exemption under Notification No.50/03-CE for goods manufactured by the assessee. The assessee had filed a declaration opting for exemption from central excise duty under the said notification as a new unit set up after a specified date. However, discrepancies were found in the description of specified goods in the declaration, leading to a visit by preventive staff to the factory. The staff discovered that the assessee had manufactured and cleared various goods falling under different headings, including beauty and skin care products. The adjudicating authority initially denied the exemption based on the incomplete declaration.

Upon appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) considered the case in terms of the exemption availed by the appellants on the goods manufactured and removed from the factory under the notification. The Commissioner allowed the exemption for goods falling under Chapter 3304 as per the declaration filed by the assessee. However, the exemption for goods falling under Chapter 3307, specifically After Shave Lotion, was denied. Both parties were aggrieved by this decision and filed appeals.

During the hearing, it was noted that the appellant had indeed filed a declaration under Notification No.50/03-CE, specifying goods falling under Chapter 3304. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the exemption for these goods as they were not in the negative list of the notification, making the assessee entitled to the exemption for goods under Chapter heading 3304.

Further, the Commissioner (Appeals) addressed the contention of the assessee regarding a subsequent declaration filed in 2005, which included different products under various headings. However, no evidence of filing this subsequent declaration was produced, and the office had no record of receiving it. As per the notification, the assessee was required to file the declaration before the first clearance of specified goods, which was not done in this case. Therefore, based on the lack of evidence and non-compliance with the notification requirements, the Commissioner rightly denied the benefit of exemption for goods other than those falling under Chapter heading 3304.

Consequently, the Tribunal found no error in the impugned order and upheld the decision to dismiss the appeals filed by both sides, thereby confirming the denial of exemption for goods not falling under Chapter 3304.