1999 (4) TMI 264 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Request for waiver of pre-deposit of duty based on the expired provisional registration certificate and subsequent application for extension.
2. Dispute regarding the entitlement to benefits as an SSI unit due to delays in issuing a permanent certificate by the authorities.
3. Opposition to the waiver request based on the absence of a formal certificate despite the application being pending for several years.

Analysis:

1. The appellant, represented by Shri M.L. Chatterjee, sought a waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 11,50,137.75, citing the expiration of a provisional registration certificate on 22-2-1990 and subsequent efforts to obtain an extension or a permanent certificate. The counsel argued that despite timely applications and active pursuit of registration, there was no rejection from the authorities, and the unit was informally considered as an SSI unit. Reference was made to previous tribunal decisions supporting the appellant's entitlement to SSI benefits under similar circumstances.

2. On the other hand, Shri T. Premkumar, representing the respondent, opposed the waiver request, highlighting that the letter from the General Manager of District Industries Centre in 1994 was not a formal certificate and emphasized the delay in issuing a definitive certificate even after five years. The argument centered on the absence of a valid certificate to support the appellant's claim for SSI benefits during the disputed period.

3. After considering the submissions from both parties, the tribunal, led by Shri G.R. Sharma, noted the sequence of events, including the expiry of the provisional certificate, the subsequent application for registration, and the communication from the District Industries Centre indicating the ongoing process for SSI registration. Citing precedents and judgments in similar cases, the tribunal decided in favor of the appellant, acknowledging the delay in formal certification but emphasizing the informal recognition of the unit as an SSI entity. Consequently, the tribunal dispensed with the pre-deposit of duty and stayed the recovery pending the appeal's finalization, aligning with the appellant's position and the established legal principles in such matters.