9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated in the Khasra no.162, 164 & 165, Raipur Industrial Area, Bhagwanpur, Roorki, which is notified in the exemption notification. There is no dispute that the goods manufactured by them are covered by this exemption. In terms of the exemption notification no.50/2003-CE in case of new unit the exemption was available to the unit, which commenced commercial production on or before 31.09.2010 and as such, unit which commenced commercial production after 31.03.2010 was not eligible for the benefit of this exemption. The respondent filed the declaration intending to avail this exemption on 15.3.2010 and in this declaration, they declared that they have commenced the commercial production. The appellant's unit was visited by the jurisdicti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ative method was used to start the commercial production in March, 2010, the appellant would not be eligible for exemption. Against this order of the Commissioner, this appeal has been filed along with stay application. 2. Heard both the sides in respect of stay application. 3. Shri B.L. Narsimhan, Advocate, ld. Counsel for the appellant pleaded that the department does not deny that there was production of goods in their factory in March, 2010, which is recorded in the RG-I Register and which has been cleared on payment of duty, that it is not material that the commercial production had been started by using some equipment's on temporary basis, that the very basis of the department's care is that the appellant have commenced production i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rms of the exemption notification no.50/2003-CE dated 10.06.2003, the benefit of this exemption would be available to a new unit, which has commenced commercial production on or before 31.3.2010. In this case, the appellant had filed the declaration regarding commencement of production on 15.3.2010. The Commissioner in para 5.13 of the impugned order-in-original has given the findings as under:- 5.13 I observe that M/s. IPPL, in spite of not fulfilling the mandatory condition of commencement of commercial production by 31.03.2010, started clearing their finished goods by wrongly claiming the exemption under notification 50/2003 dated 10.06.2003. The fact of havi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the alternative method is that they were getting small orders for small quantity and, therefore, they had manufactured small quantity instead of using the main plant for large scale manufacture. When the fact of commencement of production of the final product and its sale stands accepted by the department, even if the production was by using the alternate method not declared to the department, the benefit of the exemption cannot be denied. We are, therefore, of the prima facie view that the appellant are eligible for the benefit of duty exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE and as such, they have strong prima facie case in their favour. The requirement of pre-deposit of duty demand, interest and penalty is, therefore, waived for hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
