9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 749X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2008. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that during the month of April, 2007 to June, 2007, the appellants herein had removed molasses from manufacturing area and stored them in the katcha pit, within the factory premises, without furnishing the said details in the monthly returns during the said months. The lower authorities were of the view that this was in violation of the conditions as per C.B.E. C. Circular dated 22-10-1992, pertaining to the storage of molasses in katcha pit and no permission should be given to store the molasses in katcha pit. Entertaining such a view, the lower authorities have considered the clearances of molasses to katcha pit would amount to removal from the factory and therefore duty li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of duty within the factory premises. It is his submission that the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 1944 were no longer applicable as the period involved in this case is April, 2007 and provisions of Rule 4 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 would be applicable, which contemplates for payment of duty only at the time of removal of goods from the place where they are produced or manufactured or from the warehouse. He would submit that charge of suppression will not survive as proper accounting has been done in the Daily Production Account and facts were disclosed to the Revenue authorities vide letter dated 2-5-2007. It is his submission that the appellants had in fact paid the duty on the quantity of 8746.91 MTs of molasses as and when i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase is whether the clearance of 9991.20 MTs of molasses to katcha pits within the factory premises from the steel tanks installed in the factory amounts to removal and whether they are liable to pay the Central Excise duty on the molasses stored in katcha pits. 7. It is seen that there is no dispute that molasses on which the duty liability has arisen was stored in the katcha pits within the factory premises. It is also not in dispute that out of the said quantity of 9991.20 MTs of molasses, the assessee has cleared 8746.915 MTs of molasses on discharge of duty liability. This is evident from paragraph No. 32 of the Order-in-Original. If that be so, it has to be held that the said molasses on which the duty liability has been worked out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hing contained in sub-rule (1), (4) Commissioner may, in exceptional circumstances having regard to the nature of the goods and shortage of storage space at the premises of the manufacturer where the goods are made, permit a manufacturer to store his goods in any other place outside such premises, without payment of duty subject to such conditions as he may specify. (Emphasis supplied) 9. It can be seen from the above reproduced rule, the duty liability arises only on the clearances from the factory premises at the time of removal from the place where the goods are manufactured and stored or warehoused. In view of the clear provisions of the rule, the duty liability on the assessee arises only when the goods are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
