9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irst. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, in an order dated 10-4-2000, had confirmed demand of duty of Rs. 4,74,586/- against the assessee by denying them SSI benefit under Notification No. 8/99-C.E. dated 28-2-99 as amended by Notification No. 16/99-C.E., dated 31-3-1999 for the period 5-5-1999 to 30-10-1999. This order of the Deputy Commissioner was challenged on merits by the assessee in an appeal, which was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as per Order-in-Appeal No. 108/2000 dated 20-12-2000, whereby the demand of duty stood vacated. Against the Deputy Commissioner s order, the department also preferred an appeal belatedly. This appeal, which was filed on 3-1-2001, was obviously not available to the appellate authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner (Appeals) when he passed Order-in-Appeal No. 108/2000 dated 20-12-2000 inasmuch as the department s appeal against the Deputy Commissioner s order on the jurisdictional ground was filed only on 3-1-2001. In other words, the ground raised by the appellant in Appeal No. E/422/2001 is not even sustainable on facts. This apart, after a perusal of the Hon ble Supreme Court s judgment Pahwa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Delhi - 2005 (181) E.L.T. 339 (S.C.), we find that the jurisdictional objection raised by the department is not sustainable in law as well. We have also perused the relevant circular issued by CBEC, which, according to learned consultant, did not stand in the way of the Deputy Commissioner adjudicating the show-cause noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learing their goods on payment of duty from 1-4-1999; that they opted for SSI benefit on 3-5-1999; that they started clearing the goods without payment of duty from 5-5-1999 and that, for the period 5-5-1999 to 30-10-1999, they obtained SSI relief from the Commissioner (Appeals). The order of the appellate Commissioner [No. 108/2000 ibid] stands affirmed. If that be so, the benefit cannot be denied to the assessee for the subsequent period. Even otherwise, as at present, the action of the assessee is found to be in terms of the decision of the Tribunal s Larger Bench in the cases of Commissioner v. Marutham Textiles (P) Ltd. - 2003 (153) E.L.T. 219 (Tri. - LB), Ankit Packaging Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2004 (165) E.L.T. 228 (Tri. - LB) and Kin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
