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

2016 (1) TMI 883

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is engaged in manufacture of Colour Television, Air-Conditioners and VCD/DVD players. They filed declaration on 27/11/2003 for availing exemption under Central Excise Notification No. 50/2003-CE dated 10/06/2003. They also submitted a certificate dated 24/11/2003 of Survey Naib Tehsildar, Vikasnagar certifying that Khasra No. 262, Village Central Hope Town, Pargana Pachwadun, Tehsil Vikasnagar as their address and factory is situated therein. The Range Superintendent wrote a letter to the respondent to say that the factory situated at Plot No. C-3/1 and 262 M, Central Hope town, Pargana Pachwadun, Tehsil Vikasnagar as certified by Tehsil Vikasnagar does not get covered under Notification No. 50/2003-CE ibid. The respondent reply that they .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er the Annexure II to the notification appended to the Notification No. 50/2003-CE ibid the premises are not covered as the Village in which the factory is located at Central Hope Town, whereas as per a certificate of Naib Tehsildar the factory is located in Selaqui Village therefore they are not entitled for exemption. It is also submitted that the said notification was amended by Notification No. 27/2005-CE dated 19th May, 2005 wherein the Village Selaqui was substituted by the word Central Hope Town and Camp Road. Therefore, from the said notification also it is clear that prior to 19th May 2005 the respondent are not entitled to avail exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE. In these circumstances, impugned order to be set aside. On .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is Tribunal in the case of Tirupati LPG Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Meerut  I (supra), wherein this Tribunal observed as under :-  "7. As regards, the first point of dispute, the factory in which both the units are located is on Khasra Nos. 235, 237, 238/2 and 238/2 in village Central Hope Town, Tehsil Vikasnagar, of district Dehradun. In Annexure II, under "Existing Industrial Estates/Regions" of District Dehradun against S. No. 11 pertaining to "Selakui Industrial Regions" of village Selakui, Tehsil Vikasnagar, among other Khasra Nos., the Khasra Nos. 235 to 259 are mentioned S. No. 12, also pertaining to "Selakui Industrial Region" of "village Selakui", of "Camp Road, Central Hope Town" of Tehsil Vikasnagar covered Khasra Nos. 1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alls. Column 4 mentions the khasra number of the plots of land of which the Industrial area/Industrial estate comprises. In this case the appellant's factory is located at Khasra No. 235, 237, 238/1 and 238/2 of Selakui Industrial Region located in Tehsil Vikasnagar, District Dehradun. Even during period prior to 19/5/2005, in Annexure II under the list of "Existing Industrial Estates/Region of District Dehradun "Selakui Industrial region" of tehsil Vikasnagar is mentioned against Sl. No. 11 and against "Selakui Industrial Region" among the khasra numbers, the khasra Nos. 235 to 257 are mentioned. Therefore the factory of the appellant unit has to be treated as located in the notified Industrial area and therefore eligible for exemption eve .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hat -just because the village in which Industrial area falls was wrongly mentioned and village name is corrected by amending notification, which does not mean that before the amendment, the unit was located in the notified Industrial area and was not eligible for exemption. 8. Therefore, following the precedent decision in the case of Tirupati LPG Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Meerut - I (supra) we hold that the respondent are entitled for benefit of exemption Notification No. 50/2003-CE dated 10/06/2003 as their factory has been located in the notified area. With these terms, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Cross Objection filed by the respondent are also disposed of .....

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