9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1299X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Shree Pouches versus CCE, Jaipur-I [2017 (11) TMI 701 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], where it was held that as per the composite scheme, when there is no production due to sealing of the machine, the factory cannot be considered closed completely as one machine was continuously working. So Rule 10 is not applicable. The impugned order, so far it have rejected the refund of ₹ 14,93,334/- for the period 01/06/2013 to 07/06/2013, being the period of closure, is set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/70088/2017-EX [ SM ] - Final Order No. 70916/2018 - Dated:- 18-5-2018 - Hon ble Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri S. R. Agarwal (Advocate) for Appellant Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh (Dy. Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom 1st June, 2013 to 7th June, 2013 (seven days) and 21st June, 2013 to 30th June, 2013 (10 days). The Assistant Commissioner vide Order-in-Original dated 28th September, 2013 allowed abatement of ₹ 21,33,333/- for the period of 10 days from 21st June, 2013 to 30th June, 2013 and rejected the abatement of ₹ 14,93,334/- for the period from 1st June, 2013 to 7th June, 2013 on the ground that this period of closure is not for a continuous period of 15 days or more. Being aggrieved the appellant preferred appeal before learned Commissioner (appeals), who was pleased to reject the appeal upholding the Order-in-Original. 3. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. The learned counsel Mr. S. R. Agarwal states that 1st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reopened by the Department. In the event of the machine lying sealed, such machine cannot be called an installed machine for such period. The contention of the Revenue was that under Rule 9 of PMPM Rules, 2008, the fourth proviso provides for grant of pro-rata refund in case manufacturer permanently discontinues manufacturing of goods. So as per Rule 10 the manufacturer is supposed to deposit the entire duty on the second machine and then filed the refund claim for the period when machine was sealed. Thus the Division Bench of this Tribunal held that as per the composite scheme, when there is no production due to sealing of the machine, the factory cannot be considered closed completely as one machine was continuously working. So Rule 10 is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
