Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 1998 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1998 (9) TMI 318 - AT - Central Excise

Issues:
Dispensing with pre-deposit and stay of recovery of duty amounting to Rs. 2,81,66,163/- and penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs under Notification No. 24/91 dated 25-7-1991.

Analysis:
The Appellate Tribunal considered the case presented by the Cement Corporation of India, where they sought exemption under Notification No. 24/91, dated 25-7-1991, during a specific period. The Commissioner, in the impugned order, rejected the benefit of the Notification, citing that the licenced capacity of the applicant exceeded the specified capacity in the Notification. The applicant argued that their installed capacity did not surpass the allowed limit, providing certificates from relevant authorities to support their claim. They emphasized that the certificate issued by the specified authority should be binding unless proven otherwise for valid reasons. The applicant also highlighted previous decisions where certificates were given utmost importance by the Tribunal and courts.

In response, the department contended that the Ministry of Industrial Development's letter from 4-12-1973 indicated a higher installed capacity, just marginally exceeding the specified limit in the Notification. They argued that as the applicant was an undertaking of the Ministry of Industry, seeking clarification was unnecessary. However, the applicant presented a contradictory certification from the same Ministry, asserting a lower installed production capacity.

After evaluating the arguments from both sides, the Tribunal found that the applicants had established a strong prima facie case in their favor regarding the entitlement to the benefits under Notification No. 24/91. Considering the substantial losses incurred by the applicant and their declaration as a sick unit by BIFR, the Tribunal decided to dispense with the pre-deposit requirement and stayed the recovery of duty during the appeal process.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates