1997 (2) TMI 267 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of Notification No. 14/92-C.E. and Notification No. 1/93 for duty assessment on PVC Compounds.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Interpretation of Notification No. 14/92-C.E. and Notification No. 1/93
The case involved a dispute regarding the duty assessment on PVC Compounds by the appellants. The appellants claimed the benefit of Notification No. 14/92-C.E., dated 1-3-1992, which specified a duty rate of 35% ad valorem for the goods. However, the authorities contended that the appellants should have availed the benefit of Notification No. 1/93, which provided an exemption to SSI units. The lower authorities upheld this decision, stating that the duty liability of the appellants was determined by Notification No. 1/93, irrespective of their declaration in the C/List. The appellants argued that they were entitled to opt for the conditions specified in Notification No. 14/92-C.E. and cited a previous Tribunal decision in support of their contention.

Issue 2: Applicability and Conditions of Notification No. 14/92-C.E.
The appellants claimed that they had clearly indicated in their C/List their intention to assess the goods under Notification No. 14/92-C.E., which provided for a 35% duty rate for PVC Compounds. They argued that there was no question of choice as the notification was applicable to the goods they manufactured. The appellants asserted that even if there was an option, it rested with them to choose the benefit under Notification No. 14/92-C.E. They emphasized that the notification did not impose any conditions for availing its benefits and that they were entitled to opt under the specified conditions.

Issue 3: Tribunal's Decision
After considering the submissions from both sides, the Tribunal found that the appellants had indeed claimed the benefit under Notification No. 14/92-C.E. in their C/List. The Tribunal noted that the notification did not impose any conditions for availing its benefits and that it was applicable to the specified goods without dispute. The Tribunal held that the appellants had the option to choose between the SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93 and the benefit under Notification No. 14/92-C.E. Since the appellants had clearly indicated their choice in the C/List and were paying duty at a rate of 35%, the Tribunal concluded that they were entitled to avail the benefit of Notification No. 14/92-C.E. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, and the appellants were granted consequential relief as per the law.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision favored the appellants, confirming their entitlement to opt for the duty assessment under Notification No. 14/92-C.E. for PVC Compounds, based on their clear declaration in the C/List and the absence of any conditions in the said notification.