9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ii). Sub-clause (ii) alone provides for lapse of cenvat credit. Sub-clause (i) does not provide for lapse. The appellants have conceded that the case on hand falls only sub-clause (i) of sub-rule 3 of Rule 11 of CCR, 2004. The logical consequence is that the subject cenvat credit cannot be treated as having lapsed. The argument of the learned standing counsel that sub-clause (ii) should be read integrally with sub-clause (i) stands rejected. The provision for lapse set out in sub-clause (ii) cannot be applied in respect of the situation covered by sub-clause(i). Whether these writ appeals are competent? - HELD THAT:- The latest Instruction dated 06.08.2024 reads that appeal shall not be filed in the CESTAT, High Court and Supreme Court if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e beginning and end of the phrase "Upon each hand five," and nonsense becomes sense, albeit at the cost of some impairment of the rhythm." We have opened this judgment with the above quotation since the case on hand can be resolved by giving effect to the punctuation mark found in the relevant statutory rule. 2. The revenue is the appellant in these writ appeals. The writ petitioner is a company engaged in manufacture of cotton yarn, cotton fabrics and knitted fabrics falling under Chapter 52 and 60 of Central Excise Tariff and polyester cotton blended knitted fabrics falling under Chapter 60. They have been clearing the same for home consumption as well as for exports. They filed rebate claims in one case for Rs. 2,78,334/- and in anothe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide. Questioning the same, these intra-court appeals have been filed. 4.Heard the learned standing counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the writ petitioner/first respondent. While the standing counsel took us through the order passed by the original authority and the order passed by the government and tried to impress upon us to adopt the reasoning found therein, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order of the learned Single Judge does not call for interference. Both sides filed written arguments. 5. Section 5A(i) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is as follows : "5A. Power to grant exemption from duty of excise.-(1) If the Central Government is satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vat credit for a sum of Rs. 92,17,111/-. The question that fell for consideration was whether this cenvat credit would lapse on account of the insertion of Rule 11(3) of cenvat rules with effect from 01.03.2007. 6.Rule 11(3) is as follows : "RULE 11. Transitional provision. .... [(3) A manufacturer or producer of a final product shall be required to pay an amount equivalent to the CENVAT credit, if any, taken by him in respect of inputs received for use in the manufacture of the said final product and is lying in stock or in process or is contained in the final product lying in stock, if, - (i) he opts for exemption from whole of the duty of excise leviable on the said final product manufactured or produced by him under a notifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts of matters, they may be allied or related fields but distinct nonetheless. The Hon'ble Division Bench in State of T.N. vs. Everest Industries Ltd., (2022 SCC OnLine Mad 8919) also held that the use of the semi-colon in the sub-clauses followed by the disjunctive "or" indicated that the legislature intended to treat the sub-clauses as distinct and capable of being treated independently. 8. Let us now go back to sub-rule 3 of Rule 11. In view of the above discussion on the interpretative effect of a semi-colon, we have to hold that sub-clause (i) of sub-rule 3 of Rule 11 will have to be treated as distinct and separate from sub-clause (ii). Sub-clause (ii) alone provides for lapse of cenvat credit. Sub-clause (i) does not provide for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be heard on merits. The latest Instruction dated 06.08.2024 reads that appeal shall not be filed in the CESTAT, High Court and Supreme Court if the case fell within the prescribed monetary limits. Exceptions have also been carved out. We notice that the direction is "appeal shall not be filed". If in contravention of the instruction, an appeal is filed, the assessee can bring it to the notice of the concerned authority and seek withdrawal of the appeal. It may not be open to the tribunal or the High Court to dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue by citing the said Instruction. Once the appeal has been filed, we have to necessarily deal with the issue on merits. 10. In the case on hand, the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
