9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were to include the clearances of exempted goods also. Therefore, the show cause notice was issued alleging that the benefit of Notification No.8/2003-CE dated 1.3.2003 was not available to the appellant since the total value of clearances exceeded Rs. 300 lakhs/Rs.400 lakhs during the financial year 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05. The adjudication took place and the benefit of exemption Notification was denied but the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the assessee is not entitled to avail SSI exemption. However, he allowed the benefit of Cenvat credit to the assessee and recomputed the entire demand accordingly. Aggrieved from the said order, the assessee is in appeal and the Revenue is in appeal on the ground that they are not entitled to take credit. 3. Learned Counsel for the assessee submits that the goods namely, advertisement and publicity material i.e. calendars, posters, pictures, diaries, telephone index, folder, poster, dangler, banners etc. are branded goods and the ownership of such brands belong to the buyers of the assessee. As per para 4 of the Notification, the exemption is available under the notification shall not apply to specified goods bearing brand name or tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the SSI exemption Notification No.8/93, dated 10-3-2003 provides that clearances bearing the brand name or trade name of another person, who are ineligible for the grant of this exemption in terms of Paragraph 4 shall not be taken into account for determining the aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods for home consumption. Paragraph 4 denies exemption to specified goods bearing a brand name or trade name of another person and reads as under. 4. The exemption contained in this notification shall not apply to specified goods bearing a brand name or trade name, whether registered or not, of another person, except in the following cases (a) where the specified goods, being in the nature of components or parts of any machinery or equipment or appliances, are cleared for use as original equipment in the manufacture of the said machinery or equipment or appliances by following the procedure laid down in the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 : Provided that manufacturers, whose aggregate value of clearances of the specified goods for use as original equipment does not exceed rupees one hundred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rances. 7. It is settled law that we cannot go into the intentions of the legislature, unless there is ambiguity or lack of clarity in the notification. The notification has to be implemented according to the meaning of the words and clauses used therein. It is nobody's case that Notification No.49/2003 and No.50/2003 have been mentioned in Paragraph 4 of the notification. When Notification Nos.49 & 50/2003 have not been mentioned in Paragraph 4, we cannot read the same into the notification. Therefore the impugned order cannot be sustained and accordingly we set aside the impugned orders with consequential relief, if any, to the appellant. 8. Further, in the case of Roots Multiclean Ltd. (supra), the facts of the case are as under: 3. The appellants have two manufacturing units one at Pollachi and the other at Coimbatore. In the Pollachi unit, the appellants have manufactured branded goods in respect of which they have paid the applicable duty except for flippers which are exempt. The appellants claim small scale exemption in respect of the Coimbatore unit. Under the impugned order the appellants have been denied small scale exemption in respect of the Coimbatore unit clubb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f reckoning while calculating the eligibility under the small scale exemption notification in terms of paragraph 4(a) and (b) of Notification No.8/98-C.E., dated 2-61998 and also in terms of similar provisions in the successor notifications. The notification specifically excludes value of clearances which are fully exempt from the whole of excise duty as also the value of clearances, bearing the brand name or trade name of another person, which are ineligible for the grant of small scale exemption, while computing the aggregate value of clearances under the scheme. Accordingly, in view of such provisions, clearly the impugned order holding otherwise cannot be sustained. We set aside the same. Both the appeals are allowed. As we are allowing the appeals on merit we are not going into the grounds of limitation raised by the appellants. 9. We find that in this case, as contended by the learned Counsel for the assessee that para 3A and 4 of the notification are reproduced below:- 3A. For the purposes of determining the aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods for home consumption, mentioned in clause (vii) of the paragraph 2 of this notification, the following clearances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
