2009 (9) TMI 453 - AT - Central Excise

SSI Exemption- value of clearance- . The appellant is an SSI unit availing the benefit of Small Scale Notification No. 08/2003 dated 1-3-2003. The said Notification grants unconditional exemption to the first clearance of 150 Lakhs. The exports made by an assessee are not required to be included in computing the clearance value of 150 Lakhs. The dispute in the present appeal relates to the fact as to whether the certain quantity was actually exported by the appellants through the merchant exporter or not. Held that- we are of the view that in the absence of any rebuttal to H Form issued by the Sales Tax department we are of the view that such exports actually stands made by the assessee in which case their value is not required to be taken into consideration for arriving at the aggregate clearances of Rs. 1.5 Crores. If that be so the clearances would not exceed the exemption limit. As a result demand of duty cannot be confirmed against the appellants. The impugned order is accordingly set aside and appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellants. Stay petition also get disposed off.

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Small Scale Notification No. 08/2003 dated 1-3-2003 regarding exemption limit.
2. Dispute over whether certain quantity was actually exported by the appellants.
3. Acceptance of 'H Form' issued by the Sales Tax department as proof of export.
4. Procedural contravention in following Central Excise Rules for export notification.
5. Consideration of export value in computing aggregate clearances for duty exemption.

Interpretation of Small Scale Notification:
The appellant, an SSI unit, availed the benefit of Small Scale Notification No. 08/2003 granting unconditional exemption to the first clearance of 150 Lakhs. The exports made by the assessee were not required to be included in computing the clearance value of 150 Lakhs.

Dispute over Export Quantity:
The dispute centered around whether a certain quantity was actually exported by the appellants through a merchant exporter. The Revenue contended that since the export procedure under Central Excise Rules was not followed by the appellants, and no intimation about the export of goods was given, the benefit of export could not be extended. This led to a situation where the clearances exceeded the exemption limit, necessitating the payment of duty on the excess clearances.

Acceptance of 'H Form' for Export Proof:
The Tribunal referred to a Board Circular stating that Sales Tax documents, such as the 'H Form,' could be accepted as proof of export for exempted units. The Circular clarified that this facility was available for units undertaking exports themselves or through merchant exporters directly from the unit. In this case, the 'H Form' issued by the Sales Tax department was considered acceptable proof of export, simplifying the export procedure for exempted units.

Procedural Contravention and Export Value Consideration:
The Revenue's objection was based on procedural contravention, as they argued that the export procedure was not followed. However, the Tribunal noted that the 'H Form' issued by the Sales Tax department had not been rebutted, and no specific procedure for intimating the Revenue about exports within a certain period was prescribed. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the exports were valid, and their value should not be considered in calculating the aggregate clearances for duty exemption.

Conclusion:
As a result of the above analysis, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal in favor of the appellants. The demand for duty was not confirmed, and consequential relief was granted to the appellants. The stay petition was also disposed of in light of the decision.

---

← Previous Next →