9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 943X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the benefit of exemption from duty for the financial year 2000-2001 after filing the undertaking in terms of the said notification vide their letter dated 27.03.2000, which was acknowledged by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Coonoor Division on 31.03.2000. In the said declaration the appellant had declared that the "factory had been working for at least six months during the preceding year". Based on the said declaration in the undertaking, the assessee had availed the concession as provided under the said Notification No. 41/99 CE dated 26.11.99, and cleared 2,54,226/- kgs of tea without payment of basic excise duty at the rate of Rs. 2/- per Kg. amounting to Rs. 5,08,452/- during the period from 01.04.2000 to 31.03.2001. Verification of accounts by the department revealed that they had worked from April, 1999 to June, 1999 and four days in the month of July, 1999 and undertook trial run on 24.03.2000, shows that they have not worked for six months. Hence, SCN was issued proposing demand of duty of Rs. 5,08,452/- along with interest on the clearance of tea and imposition of penalty under Section 11AC of CEA, 1944. On adjudication, the adjudication authority dropped ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to keep the machineries under working condition for the next season. He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, New Delhi Vs. M/s. Hari Chand Shri Gopal - 2010-TIOL-95-SC-CX-CB. 4. The Ld. AR Shri B. Balamurugan, AC, appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and submits that during the course of verification it was observed by the officers that the assessee had not fulfilled the condition (b) (ii) at Sl.No. IV of the said notification in as much as they had not worked for atleast six months during the preceding year ie. 1999-2000 so as to qualify themselves for the benefit of the exemption from duty in terms of the said notification. From the RGI Register maintained by the assessee, it was observed that they had worked during the months of April, May and June, 1999 and for the first four days in July and had taken a trial run on 24.03.2000. From the green leaf weighment register, it was observed that they had purchased a quantity of 5,17,227 kgs of green leaf during 5.7.99 to 31.3.2000 and out of this they had sold 5,13,862 kgs of green leaf outside, burnt 1467 kgs and used 1898 kgs of green leaf for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessees argument that there is no condition that the factory was manufacturing for minimum of six months during the preceding year. The requirement is that it should be working for atleast six months during the preceding year. This condition has been fulfilled. Having met all the requirement as stipulated in the said Notification, I find that they are eligible to avail the exemption from payment of duty during the year 2000-2001 a envisaged in the said notification." The relevant Notification No. 41/99-CE dated 26.11.99 is also reproduced as under: "Tea " Exemption In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts goods of the description specified in column (2) of the Table below falling under sub-heading No. 0902.00 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon under section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), subject to the conditions specified in the corresponding entry in column (3) of the said Table. TA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to in condition (b). 2. This notification shall come into effect from the 10th December, 1999. Explanation. - For the purposes of this notification, "bought leaf factory" means a factory which purchases not less than two-thirds of the green leaf processed by it in the preceding financial year from any grower who has a holding not exceeding ten hectares of land under cultivation of tea. 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Hari Chand Shri Gopal (supra), wherein at para -22 discussed the interpretation of the taxing statute which is reproduced as under:- "Exemption Clause - Strict Construction 22. The law is well settled that a person who claims exemption or concession has to establish that he is entitled to that exemption or concession. A provision providing for an exemption, concession or exception, as the case may be, has to be construed strictly with certain exceptions depending upon the settings on which the provision has been placed in the Statute and the object and purpose to be achieved. If exemption is available on complying with certain conditions, the conditions have to be complied with. The mandatory requirements of those conditions must ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
