9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 591X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed thereafter on payment of duty on advolram basis - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/1027/06 - A/85817/17/SMB - Dated:- 10-2-2017 - Mr Ramesh Nair, Member(Judicial) Shri. Roshil Nichani, Advocate for the Appellants Shri. Sanjay Hasija, Superintendent(A.R.) for the Respondent Order The fact of the case is that appellant are engaged in the manufacturing /processing of textile fabrics falling under Chapter No. 52, 54 and 55 of Schedule of the Central Excise Act, 1985. The show cause notice was issued contending that appellant have contravened the provisions of. I. Rule 96ZNB(5) r.w. Rule 57 AK of Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Notification No. 7/2001 C.E. (N.T.) dated 1-3-2001 as amended by n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,848 and ₹ 6,90,359/- were confirmed and equal amount of penalties were imposed and also demanded interest under Rule 57AH of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11AB of the Act. Being aggrieved by the Order-in-Original, appellant filed appeal before the Commissiner (Appeals), who concurring with the findings of the Original authority rejected the appeal and upheld Order-in-Original, therefore appellant is before me. 2. Shri. Roshil Nachani, Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that clearances made by the appellant and demand of Cenvat credit related thereto is in respect of goods manufactured before 1-5-2001 and was lying in stock as on 30-4-2001. The said stock was cleared subsequently on payment of duty on a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T.) dated 1-3-2001 the provisions of deemed credit was not applicable to manufacturer who avails special procedure prescribed under Rule 96ZNA. In the fact of the present case, the appellant even though during the working under special procedure prescribed under Rule 96ZNA cleared the stock of finished goods of 1-5-2001 subsequently not in accordance with Rule 96ZNA but under old procedure i.e. payment of duty on advuloram basis. The relevant provisions of Rule 96ZNB is reproduced below: 96ZNB. Condition for availing of special procedure:- (7) Nothing contained in this Section shall apply to- (a) the said goods which are manufactured or produced prior to the 1st day of May, 2001 and cleared on or after that date; As per abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d cleared the goods available at the end of 30-4-2001/1-5-2001 on payment of ad valorem duty, the compounded levy scheme would not be applicable to them. 3. A Notification came to be issued on 1 st March, 2001. Under this Notification the manufacturer of goods were entitled to avail of deemed credit. A second Notification thereafter was notified on 30th April, 2001 which came into force on 1 st May, 2001. By this Notification in respect of goods which were manufactured or produced prior to 1 st May, 2001 the following provision was made :- 96ZNB. Conditions for availing of special procedure. (1) .......... (2) .......... (3) ........... (4) .......... (5) ......... (6) ......... (7) Nothing co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... availed of the benefits in terms of para 4A of the Notification dated 1 st March, 2001. A finding to that effect has also been recorded by the Tribunal in the impugned order. 7. Once that be the case, we find that the Tribunal correctly addressed itself to the issue in question. The learned Counsel for the appellants sought to contend that there is difference between manufacture and goods. In our opinion the Notification applied to manufacturer of the goods. In the instant case the respondents are manufacturers of goods. They are covered by the Notification and hence we find no error of law in the judgment of the Tribunal. Consequently, the question of law as framed would not arise. 8. In the light of that the question is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
