Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2000 (4) TMI 435

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to this appeal may briefly be stated as under : 3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of newsprint falling under sub-heading 4801.90 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985. The scrutiny of their monthly returns filed in Form RT 12 for the month of April, 1995 revealed that they had cleared newsprint weighing 1141.179 MT valued at Rs. 4,04,88,556/- without payment of duty under Notification No. 60/88, dated 1-3-1988. But they were entitled to claim the benefit of this notification only if they had produced entitlement certificate issued by the Registrar of Newsprint before the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner within a period of one month from the date of clearances. They rather failed to produce the entitlement certificate/purc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... emanded, was actually supplied to the newspapers and the same were also used by those newspapers in printing the news. The Commissioner did not accept the version of the appellants and he confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 2,02,478/- and imposed penalty of Rs. 20,25,000/- on them through the impugned order. 4. Being dissatisfied with this order of the Commissioner (adjudicating authority) the appellants have come up in appeal. 5. The learned Counsel for the appellants has assailed the validity of the impugned order on the ground that the delay in submitting the entitlement certificates for the month for April, 1995 had been wrongly not condoned by the Assistant Commissioner and that the newsprint supplied by them had been used by the news .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... th from the date of the clearances of the newsprint. Their prayer for the condonation of the delay was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner and they did not challenge that order of the Assistant Commissioner before the competent authority. Therefore, the benefit of the notification, mentioned above, could not be legally allowed to them. 8. Apart from this, the requisite certificates produced by them in terms of the Notification No. 60/88 (referred to above ) also did not in any manner help them much for claiming the benefit of this notification. They produced three certificates issued by the Registrar of Newspapers for India in order to claim the benefit of this notification. The first certificate of entitlement produced by them was dat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... naspati Company Ltd., Ghaziabad. This certificate did not bear the name of the appellants. Therefore, by this certificate the appellants could not legally clear the newsprint at nil rate of duty in terms of the exemption Notification dated 1-3-1988 referred to above. Only firm M/s. Amrit Vanaspati Co. Ltd., Ghaziabad could avail the benefit of exemption under this certificate. 10. Thus none of the certificates referred to above, produced by the appellants were in their names so as to enable them to claim the benefit of exemption Notification No. 60/88, dated 1-3-1988 and to clear the goods without payment of duty. The benefit of this notification, as observed above, could be taken only if this valid entitlement certificates were produced .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... redit availed on the inputs. Rule 57-C of the Central Excise Rules clearly enacts that credit of specified duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of the final product shall be allowed, if the final product is exempt from the whole of excise duty leviable thereon or is chargeable to nil rate of duty. The appellants had not taken recourse to the provisions of Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, for claiming refund of the duty after issue of the show cause notice. Therefore, the adjustment of duty as this stage had been rightly disallowed to them. 12. In the light of the discussion made above and keeping in view the fact and circumstances of the case, the impugned order of the Commissioner confirming the duty demand and imposing the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates