1985 (10) TMI 215 - AT - Central Excise

Issues Involved:
1. Interpretation of Notification No. 180/61-CE and Notification No. 71/78-CE.
2. Applicability of subsequent amending Notification No. 141/79-CE.
3. Determination of value limit for exemption under Notification No. 71/78-CE.
4. Consideration of case law cited by appellants.
5. Revision of demand based on ex-duty value of clearances.

Summary:

Issue 1: Interpretation of Notification No. 180/61-CE and Notification No. 71/78-CE
The appellants argued that the two notifications are independent and provide separate entitlements for exemptions. They claimed that the limit of Rs. 5 lakhs under Notification No. 71/78-CE does not include exemptions availed under Notification No. 180/61-CE. The Tribunal noted that Notification No. 71/78-CE grants exemption for clearances up to Rs. 5 lakhs and includes specific provisions on how to compute the value of clearances. The Tribunal concluded that the exemptions under Notification No. 180/61-CE are not excluded from the computation of the Rs. 5 lakhs limit under Notification No. 71/78-CE.

Issue 2: Applicability of Subsequent Amending Notification No. 141/79-CE
The appellants contended that Notification No. 141/79-CE, which clarifies that clearances exempted under other notifications should not be included in the aggregate value for Notification No. 71/78-CE, should be considered retrospective. The Tribunal rejected this argument, stating that exemption notifications are prospective unless explicitly stated otherwise, and Notification No. 141/79-CE cannot be considered clarificatory with retrospective effect.

Issue 3: Determination of Value Limit for Exemption under Notification No. 71/78-CE
The Tribunal emphasized that the conditions and explanations in Notification No. 71/78-CE clearly outline how to compute the value of clearances. Specific exclusions are mentioned, and the absence of an exclusion for goods covered by Notification No. 180/61-CE indicates a deliberate decision by the government. Therefore, the value of clearances under Notification No. 180/61-CE must be included in the Rs. 5 lakhs limit for Notification No. 71/78-CE.

Issue 4: Consideration of Case Law Cited by Appellants
The appellants cited the case of Bombay Paints and Allied Products Limited, arguing that any doubt in fiscal statutes should benefit the assessee. The Tribunal found no ambiguity in the notifications and stated that the interpretation does not create an anomaly making either notification inoperative or redundant. The Tribunal also referenced the Vikrant Tyres case, affirming that their interpretation does not conflict with established legal principles.

Issue 5: Revision of Demand Based on Ex-Duty Value of Clearances
The appellants requested that if the Tribunal upheld the department's stand, the demand should be revised based on ex-duty value of clearances. The Departmental Representative conceded this point. However, since this issue was not raised before the lower authorities, the Tribunal left it to them to review the facts and take appropriate action.

Conclusion:
The appeals were rejected, and the Tribunal upheld the department's interpretation of the relevant notifications. The matter of revising the demand based on ex-duty value of clearances was left to the lower authorities for consideration.

← Previous Next →