2013 (1) TMI 384 - HC - Central Excise

Benefits of Notification - Instead of filing the declaration under Notification No. 50, the same was filed under Notification No. 49 - Held that - A look at Notification No. 49 will show that the goods dealt with by the assessee were not covered by said Notification, but the goods dealt with by the assessee were covered by Notification No. 50. By submitting a declaration, as was submitted, the assessee was entitled to the benefits of Notification No. 50. No question of Law. In favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Submission of incorrect declaration under Notification No. 49 instead of Notification No. 50 for obtaining benefits.
2. Tribunal's decision in favor of the assessee.
3. Dismissal of the appeal based on the genuineness of the mistake in declaration submission.

Issue 1: Submission of incorrect declaration under Notification No. 49
The assessee submitted a declaration under Notification No. 49 to obtain benefits, but the goods manufactured were not covered under this notification. The goods were, in fact, covered under Notification No. 50. The contention was that the declaration was mistakenly filed under the wrong notification. The Tribunal upheld that the assessee was entitled to benefits under Notification No. 50 based on the submitted declaration, despite the error in mentioning the notification number.

Issue 2: Tribunal's decision
The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, acknowledging that the declaration submitted under Notification No. 49 was a genuine mistake. It was established that the goods dealt with by the assessee were covered by Notification No. 50, and the benefits should be granted accordingly. The Tribunal's decision supported the assessee's claim for benefits under the correct notification.

Issue 3: Dismissal of the appeal
The High Court, after reviewing the case, found that the genuineness of the mistake in filing the declaration under the wrong notification was not disputed. As the matter had already been resolved in favor of the assessee by the Tribunal, the High Court concluded that there were no legal or factual issues to be further examined. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed based on the established facts and the Tribunal's decision in favor of the assessee.