1999 (5) TMI 374 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Notification No.175/86 dated 1-3-1986 regarding duty exemption for S.S.I. units.
2. Application of previous tribunal decisions in determining duty exemption eligibility.
3. Consideration of Supreme Court rulings on tribunal decisions.
4. Relevance of recent tribunal decisions in similar cases.

Interpretation of Notification No.175/86 dated 1-3-1986:
The Revenue appealed against an order granting duty exemption to an S.S.I. unit under Notification No.175/86 dated 1-3-1986. The contention was that the exemption was limited to Rs. 15 lakhs for goods falling under one chapter, even if the total clearance value was up to Rs. 30 lakhs. Citing the case of Ramakrishna Engg. Works v. C.C.E., Bolpur, it was argued that the entire exemption was not applicable if the value exceeded Rs. 15 lakhs for goods under one chapter. The Revenue claimed that the order allowing the Respondents' appeal was erroneous.

Application of previous tribunal decisions:
The Respondents argued that the issue had already been settled by previous tribunal decisions, specifically referring to EL.P.EM. Industries v. CCE, Purushotham Goculdas Plywood Co. v. CCE, and Premier Rubbber Traders v. CCE. They contended that the Collector (Appeals) rightly allowed their appeal based on these precedents, indicating no substance in the Revenue's appeal.

Consideration of Supreme Court rulings on tribunal decisions:
The Tribunal analyzed various precedents, including the case of Ramakrishna Engineering Works, EL.P.EM Industries, and Khalsa Pulp & Paper Industries Ltd. v. C.C.E. The Tribunal noted that the Supreme Court had upheld the view taken in the EL.P.EM. Industries case, dismissing the Department's appeal. Furthermore, the Tribunal referred to the case of Solar Packaging Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C., Rajkot, where it was held that the decision in Ramakrishna Engineering Works was no longer valid law. The Tribunal also mentioned similar findings in the case of ESS ESS Engineerings v. C.C.E. Based on these considerations, the Tribunal concluded that the matter was not open to further debate and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

Relevance of recent tribunal decisions in similar cases:
The Tribunal emphasized that the issue had been extensively reviewed in recent cases, with consistent rulings following the EL.P.EM. Industries precedent. Referring to decisions like Solar Packaging Pvt. Ltd. and ESS ESS Engineerings, the Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and declined to interfere with the impugned order. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.