9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 545X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to the product covered by chapter heading 54.03 by Notification No. 24/94, dated 20-5-94. The department was of the view that since the Notification No. 1/93 was effective from 1-4-94, clearances from this date should be computed and not only from the date when the assessees/respondents opted for the benefit of the notification. On this basis, show cause notices were issued for recovery of the differential duty during the period after first clearance value of Rs. 50 lakhs was crossed. The demand was confirmed by the adjudicating authority against whose orders appeals were filed. The Commissioner (Appeals), the lower appellate authority set aside the order of the adjudication holding as under :- The impugned orders and the submissions have been considered by me. The concessional rate of duty was availed from June, 1994 after filing the classification list in which the benefit of concessional rate of duty under Notification 1/93 was claimed by the appellants. On the other hand the lower authority, in the impugned orders referred to above, granted concessional rate of duty by taking into account the clearances from 1-4-94, which is not correct. Till 25-4-94 the goods falling und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d set aside the impugned order dated 18th May 2002, passed by the CEGAT in Appeal Nos. E/506 to 522, 524 to 528/97. This Court, therefore, issue a writ of mandamus and declare that the actual effect of the benefit of Notification No. 1/93 was available to the manufacturer only from 20th May, 1994. This Court also hold that the petitioners were entitled the benefit of Notification No. 1/93 by computing the value of clearance from the date on which the petitioners opted for this exemption in the year 1994-95. In view of the same, the Special Civil Application is allowed to that extent. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs. 5. Following the ratio of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court s judgment cited supra, we hold that the benefit of the notification is available to the assessees from 20-5-94 and that they are entitled to the benefit of the notification by computation of the value of clearances from the date on which they opted for the exemption in 1994-95 viz., 17th June 94. 6. The appeals are disposed of as above. Cross objections are disposed of accordingly. Sd/ (Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram) Member (Judicial) 7. [Contra per : C. Satapathy, Member (T)]. - I have care ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 346 (Tribunal), the Larger Bench following a reasoned decision of the Honourable Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of B.K. Rubber Industries (P) Ltd. v. UOI - 1993 (68) E.L.T. 575 (M.P.) ruled that the slab of Rs. 30 lakhs has to be chronologically computed from the 1st day of April including clearances of duty paid goods. This decision considered and over-ruled the earlier decision of the two Member Bench in the case of Watts Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector - 1994 (70) E.L.T. 127 (Tribunal) which allowed computation of the slab from the date of availing the exemption. 10. It is, however, a fact that Ramakrishna (supra) did not consider a case where the goods were specified after the commencement of a financial year. Such a situation has been addressed after taking into account several conflicting decisions by another Larger Bench recently in the case of CCE, Coimbatore v. Marutham Textiles (P) Ltd. - 2003 (153) E.L.T. 219 (Tri.-LB). The Bench has noted that Revenue has accepted the non-includibility of duty paid clearances from 1-4-1994 to 24-4-1994 in the slab of Rs. 30 lakhs. It has, thereafter, proceeded to decide that the slab of Rs. 30 lakhs should be computed w.e.f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 30 lakhs slab has to be done from 25-4-1994. I order accordingly. Sd/- (C. Satapathy) Member (Technical) POINTS OF DIFFERENCE 13. The following difference of opinion is placed before the Hon ble President for reference to 3rd Member : Whether the benefit of Notification No. 1/93-C.E., dated 28-2-93 is available to the assessees with effect from 20-5-94 and value of clearances is required to be computed for this purpose, from the date on which the assessees opted for exemption in 1994-95, as held by Member (Judicial) OR the value of clearances is required to be computed from 25-4-1994, as held by Member (Technical). Sd/- (C. Satapathy) Member (Technical) Sd/- (Jyoti Balasundaram) Member (Judicial) 14. [Order per : S.S. Shekhon, Member (T)]. - The question in this reference, to me, for decision is computing the value of clearances under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. when the assessee s product manufactured was declared as specified goods only with effect from 20-5-1994 under the said notification. 15. After hearing both sides, and considering the issues, and having the benefit of the order of the learned Members, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
