1996 (6) TMI 184 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Appeal against demand of duty under Notification Nos. 77/85 and 175/86 for exceeding value limit, validity of show cause notice for extended period, inclusion of exempted goods in clearance value calculation, effect of unchallenged Assistant Collector's order, classification of products under Tariff Item 2502.00.

Analysis:
1. The appeal challenged the Additional Collector's order confirming duty demand due to exceeding the value limit for claiming exemption under Notification Nos. 77/85 and 175/86. The appellants contended that the value of clearances from all three units did not exceed the limit, emphasizing the exclusion of certain clearances for computing the limit.

2. The learned Advocate argued that issuing a second show cause notice for an extended period after the discharge of the first notice on the same grounds was improper. He emphasized that the differential duty could not be demanded again, especially considering the earlier show cause notice's discharge.

3. The appellants asserted that they followed Chapter X procedure and should not be penalized for paying duty in one factory. They argued against double taxation by including goods cleared from one factory in the total clearances for duty calculation.

4. Additionally, the appellants relied on previous Tribunal orders to support their case, highlighting that the unchallenged Assistant Collector's order should be considered valid unless overturned by the competent authority, as per legal principles cited from the case law.

5. The Revenue contended that even exempted goods must be included in clearance value calculation, citing relevant case law to support their argument.

6. The Tribunal emphasized that once a show cause notice was issued on the same grounds as a previous notice, the extended period could not be invoked. The unchallenged Assistant Collector's order was deemed valid, and the Tribunal relied on previous case law to support the decision regarding the classification of products under Tariff Item 2502.00.

7. Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the Additional Collector's order and allowed the appeal based on the arguments presented and the legal principles applied, including the interpretation of relevant case law and procedural considerations.