9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 447 - AT - Central ExciseWaiver of pre-deposit of duty - Manufacture of Twisted Polyester Filament Yarn and Draw-twisted Polyester Filament Yarn out of duty paid textured or draw-twisted polyester filament yarn- Exemption Notification No. 6/2002-C.E., Sr. No. 123 and 126 - Held that - condition Nos. 123 & 126 of Notification No. 6/2002 which exempts Twisted Polyester Filament Yarn and Draw-twisted Polyester Filament Yarn, produced by the appellant are subjected to conditions mentioned in the notification - said conditions does not specify only use of specified raw material on which the duty has been paid, which would indicate that the appellant is eligible to use non-duty paid material along with duty-paid specified material for manufacture of final product - appellant has made out a prima facie case for the waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved - application for waiver of the pre-deposit of the amounts involved is allowed and recovery thereof stayed till the disposal of appeal - Following decision of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABAD Versus SUNDER STEELS LTD. 2005 (2) TMI 117 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest, and penalty under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E., Sr. No. 123 and 126. Analysis: The appellant filed a Stay Petition seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 1,74,79,458/-, along with interest and penalty imposed. The amounts were confirmed by the adjudicating authority within the limitation period, citing the appellant's ineligibility to avail the benefit of Notification No. 6/2002-C.E., Sr. No. 123 and 126. The appellant argued that the notification exempts Twisted Polyester Filament Yarn and Draw-twisted Polyester Filament Yarn, which they manufacture using both duty-paid textured or draw-twisted polyester filament yarn and non-specified raw materials. They relied on a Supreme Court judgment in a similar case and highlighted that the notification does not mandate the exclusive use of specified raw materials. The appellant also referenced previous Stay Orders granted by the Bench in their favor during the initial litigation rounds. The Additional Commissioner (A.R.) supported the lower authorities' findings and suggested remanding the matter back as the Commissioner overlooked the Tribunal's directions in the Final Order. After reviewing the submissions and records, the Tribunal observed that the conditions of Notification No. 6/2002, pertaining to Twisted Polyester Filament Yarn and Draw-twisted Polyester Filament Yarn, do not expressly require the 'only' use of specified raw materials on which duty has been paid. Consequently, the Tribunal agreed with the appellant's argument that they could utilize both duty-paid specified material and non-duty paid material for manufacturing the final product. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's case, referencing the Supreme Court's judgment in Sunder Steels Ltd., and granted the waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved. As a result, the recovery of the said amounts was stayed until the appeal's disposal. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the application for the waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest, and penalty under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E., Sr. No. 123 and 126, based on the appellant's prima facie case and the interpretation of the notification's conditions regarding the use of specified raw materials for manufacturing the exempted products.
|
