1991 (8) TMI 194 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Notification No. 175/86 for availing exemption under Central Excise Tariff.
2. Applicability of SSI registration certificate for different manufacturing units.
3. Requirement of filing declaration for availing exemption under specific notifications.
4. Consideration of quantum of clearances for determining exemption eligibility.
5. Judicial interpretation of the term "availing of the exemption."

Analysis:

1. The case involved the interpretation of Notification No. 175/86 under the Central Excise Tariff for availing exemption. The dispute arose as the appellants did not possess an SSI registration certificate for their unit at Lower Parel, leading to a challenge regarding their entitlement to the exemption.

2. The appellants argued that their SSI registration certificate dated 24-1-1979 for the unit at Andheri should be applicable to their unit at Lower Parel after selling the former. They contended that they fulfilled the conditions of para 4 of Notification No. 175/86 and should be granted the exemption.

3. The learned consultant highlighted that availing of exemption under specific notifications did not hinge on filing declarations under other notifications. The Tribunal's precedent in Collector of Central Excise v. Atlas Radio and Electronics Pvt. Ltd. supported this argument, emphasizing that exemption eligibility was based on clearances rather than licensing control declarations.

4. The judgment considered the quantum of clearances made by the appellants in previous financial years to determine their exemption eligibility. The appellants' clearances in the financial years 1983-84, 1984-85, and 1985-86 were below the exemption limit, indicating their entitlement to the exemption under Notification 175/86 for the financial year 1986-87.

5. Ultimately, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing their appeal and granting them the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 175/86. The judgment emphasized that the appellants had been availing the exemption in the preceding financial year, fulfilling the conditions for exemption eligibility under the notification.

6. Additionally, the Tribunal clarified that the citation relied upon by the respondent was irrelevant to the current case, as it did not pertain to the specific provisions and interpretation issues under consideration in the present dispute.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive understanding of the legal issues, arguments presented, and the Tribunal's decision in the case.