9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1999 (3) TMI 328 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Entitlement to benefit of Notification No. 175/86 2. Validity of SSI certificate during the period in question Entitlement to benefit of Notification No. 175/86: The case involved a revenue appeal against an order passed by the Collector (Appeals) regarding the entitlement of the assessee to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86. The Superintendent had issued a demand, denying the benefit due to the absence of an SSI certificate. The Tribunal remanded the case for reconsideration upon the production of the certificate. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the demands, but the Collector (Appeals) set them aside, leading to the revenue's appeal. The assessee had a provisional certificate renewed until 14-9-1984. After correspondence, the Government clarified that the assessee was a small-scale unit, issuing a permanent certificate in 1987. The Collector accepted this as a continuation of the provisional certificate, granting the benefit of the Notification and allowing the appeal. Validity of SSI certificate during the period in question: The revenue contended that the assessee lacked a valid SSI certificate during the relevant period, necessitating demand confirmation. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, upheld the Collector (Appeals)' findings as legally sound. It referenced precedents like the C.K. Suresh & Co. case and the Sahuwala Cylinders Ltd. case, emphasizing that the unit should be considered an SSI unit from the application date for the certificate. The Tribunal stressed that when the issuing authority declared SSI status from a specific date, the benefit could not be denied. It highlighted that the registration certificate should be treated effective from the application date, as seen in the Welbeck Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. case. The Tribunal concluded that the permanent certificate issued in 1987, confirming the provisional one, covered the demands raised for the period, aligning with the cited judgments. In light of the above analysis, the Tribunal found no merit in the revenue's appeal and rejected it accordingly.
|
