1999 (8) TMI 374 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Notification No. 1/93 regarding availing exemption for specific products.
2. Applicability of the non obstante clause in the notification.
3. Whether an appellant can claim exemption for some products and not others.

Analysis:
The case involved the interpretation of Notification No. 1/93 regarding the exemption of duty for specific products manufactured by the appellant. The appellant sought to pay duty for one product and claim Modvat credit while continuing to avail exemption for the other two products. The lower authorities denied this request, citing a non obstante clause in the notification. The clause stated that a manufacturer could choose not to avail exemption for certain products but pay duty for subsequent clearances in the same financial year. However, the Appellate Tribunal noted that it is established that an appellant can claim exemption for some products and not others, as supported by previous judgments.

Regarding the applicability of the non obstante clause, the Tribunal clarified that the clause does not prevent an appellant from claiming exemption for some products while paying duty for others. The clause is intended for situations where a manufacturer opts for exemption for part of the financial year and not for the remaining part, but it does not restrict the selective availing of exemption for specific products. Each specified product should be considered separately, and the clause does not require all specified goods to be treated collectively.

Based on the above analysis, the Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' decision and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant. The decision affirmed the appellant's right to claim exemption for two products while choosing to pay duty for the third product, in accordance with Notification No. 1/93.