9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2002 (2) TMI 149 - AT - Central Excise
Issues: Rejection of abatement claims for specific periods under Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.
Analysis: 1. Claim Rejection Basis: The Commissioner rejected the abatement claims made by the appellants for the periods 2-12-97 to 9-12-97 and 3-2-98 to 10-2-98, citing non-fulfillment of conditions under Rule 96ZO(2) related to closure of furnace. The Commissioner deemed these conditions as mandatory for claiming abatement of duty based on legal precedents. 2. Appellants' Contentions: The appellants argued that the requirement of a declaration under clause (e) was satisfied through their letters of intimation of closure and restart, providing exact timings. They contended that non-mention of closing stock in the closure letter should not be a significant lapse if stock details were available in the abatement claim or RG-I register. 3. Legal Precedents: The appellants' advocate cited cases where non-intimation of electric meter reading or delays in closure intimation were not grounds for rejecting abatement claims. The advocate highlighted instances where delays were condoned, and claims were allowed despite technical lapses. 4. Judgment Analysis: The appellate tribunal found that the continuity of closure periods was evident from the letters of closure and restart submitted by the appellants. The tribunal opined that the failure to file a formal declaration under clause (e) should not have led to claim rejection. However, non-disclosure of stock positions in certain documents was considered a lapse, with different outcomes for each period analyzed. 5. Decision: The tribunal allowed the appeal in part, holding that the appellants fulfilled the conditions under clause (d) for the period 2-12-97 to 9-12-97 but failed to do so for the period 3-2-98 to 10-2-98. The tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with the mandatory conditions under Rule 96ZO(2) to claim abatement of duty, balancing technical requirements with the purpose of curbing duty evasion under the Compounded Levy Scheme.
|
