2001 (1) TMI 309 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to benefit of exemption Notification 1/93.
2. Requirement for duty computation.
3. Interpretation of Notification 1/93 and related judgments.
4. Remand for de novo consideration.

Entitlement to benefit of exemption Notification 1/93:
The appeal arose from a previous order denying the appellants the benefit of exemption Notification 1/93 due to clearing one item on duty payment. The appellants argued that the matter was remanded for reconsideration in light of specific judgments, and they wanted the case decided on merits based on their submissions. The Tribunal noted that the matter had been considered previously, and the appellants could avail of the exemption for one item while paying duty for others. The Tribunal referred to relevant judgments and dismissed the departmental appeal, affirming the decision in favor of the assessee. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the issue was concluded in favor of the assessee, allowing the prayer for dispensation of pre-deposit.

Requirement for duty computation:
The learned SDR submitted that duty computation was necessary even if the matter was to go back to the original authority. The Tribunal acknowledged this submission, emphasizing the need for duty computation before further proceedings.

Interpretation of Notification 1/93 and related judgments:
The Tribunal analyzed the interpretation of Notification 1/93 and related judgments, highlighting the appellants' ability to avail of exemptions for specific items while paying duty for others. The Tribunal referenced relevant case law and the dismissal of the departmental appeal by the Supreme Court, affirming the Tribunal's decision in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal concluded that the issue had been settled in favor of the assessee, allowing the appeals by remand for de novo consideration.

Remand for de novo consideration:
Considering the recent decision and the specific Notification No. 1/93, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the appeals for de novo decision by the original authority. The parties consented to the disposal of the appeals, and the Tribunal emphasized the need for a fresh examination of the matter in light of the latest decision and relevant amendments. If the original authority had already decided the matter, the appellants were to be given a hearing opportunity for a detailed order. Therefore, the appeal was allowed by way of remand for further consideration.