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

2014 (12) TMI 739

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to 1st September, 1997. Hence, the assessee became ineligible to claim concessional rate of duty as per the compounded levy scheme. However, by a Notification No.4/2000-CE(NT) dated 31.1.2000, where the concessional duty, as applicable under Notification No.50/1997 dated 01.8.1997, was made applicable for the period 01.08.1997 ending with 31.8.1997. - assessee itself had admitted that Notification No.4/2000-CE(NT) dated 31.1.2000 is applicable for the goods cleared during August 1997, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after taking note of various notifications, viz., Notification No.48/97, CE dated 01.08.1997, 50/97-CE dated 01.08.1997, 57/97-CE dated 30.08.1997, deleted the penalty also. Hence, th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t Gummidipundi and the other at Salem. They are engaged in the manufacture of hot re-rolled products of non-alloy steel falling under various Headings in Chapter 72 of the CETA Schedule. Pursuant to the notification No.33/97-CE(NT) dated 01.08.1997, the assessee was brought under the compounded levy scheme in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, whereby, the duty liability was determined on the basis of Annual Capacity of Production. 4. The issue in the present case relates to rate of duty applicable for clearance made during the period 1st August, 1997 to 31st August, 1997. By notification No.50/97-CE dated 01.08.1997, in respect of goods manufactured or produced prior to 1st August, 1997, cleared on or afte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed penalty of ₹ 15,000/-. 7. As against the order passed by the Original Authority in respect of Salem Unit, an appeal was preferred before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), who, by order dated 12.1.2004, recorded the submission of the assessee and held as follows: 5.5 As accepted by the appellant in para 5 of the written submission dated 20.11.2003 that the rate of duty of ₹ 300/- per MT is in consonance with the Notification no 4/2000 CE (NT) dt.31.01.2000, for the goods manufactured and cleared during August 1997 and the duty demanded by the Lower Authority for the quantity of 1170.550MT as proposed in the SCN dt.27.11.97 is correct and the amount of duty of ₹ 351165/- demanded by the Lower Authority .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeals. 10. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned standing counsel appearing for the second respondent and perused the materials placed on record. 11. It is seen that the compounded levy scheme was introduced from 01.08.1997 vide notification No.33/97-CE(NT), wherein it was stated that in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, the duty liability was determined on the basis of Annual Capacity of Production. The assessee cleared the goods under this compounded levy scheme. Subsequently, by Notification No.57 of 1997-CE dated 30th August, 1997, the relevant date, viz., 1st August, 1997, was changed to 1st September, 1997. Hence, the assessee be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fication No.48/97, CE dated 01.08.1997, 50/97-CE dated 01.08.1997, 57/97-CE dated 30.08.1997, deleted the penalty also. Hence, the questions of law raised do not merit consideration, as the assessee had already accepted the benefit of Notification No.4/2000-CE(NT) dated 31.1.2000. 14. For the foregoing reasons, we pass the following order: (i)On the questions of law raised, we are of the view that the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the Adjudicating Authority. (ii)Consequently, the order of the Tribunal dated 09.03.2006 stands confirmed. In the result, both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2006 are also dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Central Excise .....

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