1997 (8) TMI 130 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 23/89, dated 1-3-1989.
- Whether the appellant's production capacity certificate meets the requirements.
- Whether the principles of natural justice were observed in the case.

Analysis:
The case involved an appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi, regarding the entitlement of the appellant, an SSI unit manufacturing cement, to the benefit of Notification No. 23/89, dated 1-3-1989. The appellants claimed they were eligible for reduced rates under the notification, but the benefit was denied due to the requirement of producing a certificate of licensed capacity from the appropriate authorities. The appellants argued that a certificate from the Director of Industries should be accepted based on government instructions, which allowed considering annual capacity instead of licensed capacity. They contended that the authorities failed to consider these instructions, leading to the denial of benefits.

The appellant further argued that they had previously received similar concessions under Notification No. 124/87 based on a certificate from the District Industries Officer, Jodhpur. They emphasized the circular of the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, directing the acceptance of certificates from prescribed authorities regarding annual capacity. The appellant claimed that the principles of natural justice were not followed as no hearing was granted, and the order was passed ex parte. The Department reiterated its stance, highlighting discrepancies in the clarity and relevance of the certificate produced by the appellant.

Upon considering the submissions, the Tribunal acknowledged the importance of government instructions and circulars, including those related to SSI units under Notification Nos. 36/87 and 124/87. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument that the circulars should be considered for the present notification as well. However, the Tribunal noted discrepancies in the production capacity details provided by the appellant and emphasized the need for clarification from the relevant authorities regarding the production capacity during the relevant period. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for a personal hearing to ensure the issue is decided in light of the observations and legal requirements, including principles of natural justice.