2012 (9) TMI 380 - AT - Central Excise

Waiver of pre-deposit denial of benefit of Notification No. 69/2003-C.E., - exemption from payment of duty in respect of the Unit located in Assam - As the amount of duty (minus interest and penalty) is already in deposit in the Escrow Account, the interest of the revenue stands adequately protected - amount of duty is already in deposit in Escrow Account - pre-deposit of duty, interest and penalty is waived stay application allowed

Summary

Issues: Application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Rules due to denial of benefit of Notification No. 69/2003-C.E. for excisable goods manufactured in Shed No. 17.

Analysis:
1. The Applicant filed an Application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 19,31,96,574.00 along with penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Rules. The demand was confirmed by denying the benefit of Notification No. 69/2003-C.E. for excisable goods manufactured in Shed No. 17. The Revenue contended that the Applicant wrongly availed the benefit of the Notification as the goods were manufactured in Shed No. 17 after the specified date, making them ineligible for the exemption.

2. The Applicant argued that the demand pertained to a period beyond the normal limitation period, and hence, was time-barred. They also highlighted that they had regularly filed returns showing the benefit of the Notification, and any alleged suppression was not intentional. Additionally, the Applicant pointed out a previous case where a similar issue was raised regarding other sheds in their unit, which was resolved favorably by the High Court.

3. The Revenue maintained that the benefit of the Notification was rightly denied as commercial production in Shed No. 17 commenced after the specified date. They emphasized the findings of the Adjudicating Authority regarding suppression of facts and misstatement to evade duty payment, supporting the validity of the demand made.

4. The Tribunal noted a previous case involving the Applicant's other sheds, where the High Court had directed the waiver of pre-deposit due to the duty amount already deposited in an Escrow Account. Following this precedent, the Tribunal waived the pre-deposit of duty, interest, and penalty in the present case, staying the recovery during the pendency of the Appeal. The case was listed for further proceedings alongside the previous case for coherence.

5. The Tribunal also scheduled the consideration of a Miscellaneous Application for additional grounds during the regular hearing, ensuring all relevant aspects of the case would be addressed comprehensively. The decision was pronounced and dictated in an open court session, maintaining transparency and procedural integrity throughout the proceedings.