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 (6) TMI 767

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Commissioner whose reports dated 19.11.2007 and 13.02.2008, the Commissioner relies in the order. Inasmuch as copies of these reports have not been furnished to the appellant, the Commissioner has passed this order behind the back of the appellant clearly disregarding principles of natural justice. We also find that the basis of the demand does not emerge from the impugned order itself, making this error sufficient to set-aside the impugned order. Demand set aside - Decided in favor of assessee. - Excise Appeal No. 1381 of 2008 - Final Order No. 52071 / 2016 - Dated:- 7-6-2016 - MS. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. V. PADMANABHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Petitioner : Shri B. L. Narasimhan, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Sanjay Jain, DR ORDER PER: V. PADMANABHAN: The present appeal is directed against the order dated 31.03.2008 passed by the Commissioner in which the demands for duty raised in show cause notices dated 24.05.2006 and 06.12.2006 were finalised. 2. Appellant have a manufacturing unit located in Bhimtal Distt Nainital which is licensed by the Uttaranchal Government. The unit is situated within notified Industrial ar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 15.07.2006 and 15.05.2006 respectively after the period in dispute. 4. The appellant has challenged the impugned order mainly on the following grounds: (i) The exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE is qua industrial unit and not for individual goods. The intermediate products were integral parts of WFCP plant and substantial expansion in respect of this plant has been certified by IIT, Roorkee, IISC, Bangalore and Chartered Engineer and have been accepted by the Revenue. (ii) The appellant has cited several decisions of this Tribunal which have clearly ruled that to claim the exemption under the Notification No. 50/2003-CE, it is not necessary that each and every part / section of the factory should be expanded. If the substantial expansion of the unit as a whole has taken place, the expansion would be admissible to all the products manufactured therein. They relied on the following judgments: * CCE, Meerut-II vs. Prakash Straw Board Pvt. Ltd., - 2016 (332) ELT 741 (Tri. Delhi). * CCE, Chandigarh vs. Bhandari Deepak Industries Pvt. Ltd. - 2015 (318) ELT 677 (Tri. Del.) * CCE, Shillong vs. Monabari Tea Estate - 2003 (154) ELT 230 (Tri. Kolkata) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h sides and perused the records. 7. Appellant has claimed the benefit of Notification No. 50/2003-CE which exempts the goods specified in the First and Second Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, other than the negative list and specified in Annexure-I of the notification, cleared from a unit located in the Industrial Growth Centre or Industrial Infrastructure Development Centre or Export Promotion Industrial Park or Industrial Estate specified in Annexure-II. The relevant part of para 2 of the notification reads as follows: The exemption contained in this notification shall apply only to the following kinds of units, namely:- (i) .... ..... ...... ...... ...... (ii) industrial units existing before the 7th day of January, 2003, but which have undertaken substantial expansion by way of increase in installed capacity by not less than twenty-five per cent on or after the 7th day of January, 2003, but have commenced commercial production from such expanded capacity, not later than the 31st day of March, 2007 . 8. The fact that the appellant has satisfied the condition of substantial expansion for t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has undertaken substantial expansion. It is fairly obvious that the Water Filter Cartridge and EVA Food Grade Pipes are used as intermediate products in the manufacture of the final products namely WFPC and WCCP. A perusal of the reports submitted by the IIT Roorkee, IISC, Bangalore as well as Chartered Engineer clearly show that the manufacturing facilities of these intermediate products are not independent but are integrated with the production lives of the final products. Accordingly, Water Filter Cartridge and EVA Food Grade Pipes are manufactured corresponding to the number of finished products manufactured during a particular period. It is admitted by the appellant that the substantial expansion in respect of the intermediate products have been undertaken only after the period of dispute. This brings us to the more fundamental question whether to increase the installed capacity of the unit, the capacity of each and every products manufactured in the unit needs to be increased. This aspect has been considered by this Tribunal over and over again. It has been held that only the overall increase in the installed capacity is to be taken into consideration while considering the ex .....

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