2000 (11) TMI 1164 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to validity of Order-in-Appeal for additional duty of Excise on Cotton Yarn & Cotton Waste cleared for DTA sale. Benefit of Exemption Notification No. 55/91. Time-barred demand for duty. Proper authorization for filing appeal.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal challenged the validity of the Order-in-Appeal reversing the Order-in-Original demanding additional duty of Excise on Cotton Yarn & Cotton Waste cleared for Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) sale. The Respondents, a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU), cleared soft waste for DTA sale without paying additional duty, leading to a demand for duty by the Assistant Commissioner. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the demand citing the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 55/91 dated 25-7-91 and the demand being time-barred. The Revenue appealed to the Tribunal against this decision.

The Revenue contended that additional duty was payable on the goods cleared for DTA sale even by a 100% EOU. On the other hand, the Respondents argued that they were rightfully granted the benefit of Notification No. 55/91 and that the demand was time-barred. The Tribunal examined the records, confirming that the Respondents were a 100% EOU and had cleared goods for DTA sale under the exemption of Notification No. 55/91. The Tribunal noted that the Board Circular also supported the Respondents' claim for exemption. The Tribunal emphasized that the Revenue was bound by the Board Circular and could not act against it, upholding the validity of the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to grant the benefit of the notification.

Moreover, the Tribunal found the demand raised by the Revenue for the disputed period to be time-barred. The demand was first raised after a significant period without any grounds for invoking an extended period mentioned. The issue of the authorization for filing the appeal was also addressed, with the Respondents' counsel withdrawing the plea. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, ruling that it lacked merit based on the discussion and findings regarding the benefit of the exemption notification and the time-barred nature of the demand.