9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1053X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al drugs, goods and products falling under Chapter 30 of CETA, 1985. Based on the intelligence gathered by the Departmental officer, it was observed that the appellant had availed the SSI Exemption as per Notification No. 08/2003 CE dated 01.03.2003 and concurrently collected the Central Excise Duty from their customers but not deposited with the Dept, during the period from 05/2008 to 02/2009 and hence contravened the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore the adjudicating authority issued an show-cause notice demanding the central excise duty of Rs. 21,87,178/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand One Hundred and Seventy Eight only) along with interest under Section 11DD of Central Excise Act, 1944 and proposing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed without considering the factual and legal position. He further submitted that the impugned order is contrary to the binding judicial precedent on the same issue. Learned counsel further submitted that it is undisputed fact that during material period of dispute i.e. from 11.05.2008 to 17.02.2009 (when the appellants were working under SSI exemption Notification No. 8/2003 CE dated 01.03.2003 that they had not at all charged any Central Excise duty in their Central Excise invoices issued to their customers and had charged only the agreed landed price and VAT thereon. He further submitted that the appellant never collected Excise duty during the period when he was availing SSI exemption and in the agreement even though the Excise duty was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n other words the final price was the same as was fixed even prior to and after crossing the SSI exemption limit, He further submitted that undisputedly the appellants have not indicated the amount of Central Excise duty in their Central Excise invoices issued during the period of enjoying the SSI exemption hence the question of application of provisions of Section 11D does not arise. Learned counsel also submitted that during the material period of dispute the rate of duty applicable was 8% BED, 2% EC and 1% S&H EC (upto 06.12.2008) and 4% BED, 2% EC & 1% S&H EC (from 07.12.2008 onwards) whereas the demand has been raised at the rate of 16% BED, 2% EC and 1% S&H EC. This itself as per the counsel shows that the demand has been raised merel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
