Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Hyderabad
Vijayanand Fabrics (P) Ltd. vs Cc And Ce on 18 August, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2001(94)ECR538(TRI.-HYDERABAD)
ORDER S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)
1. These two appeals and stay applications are on a narrow compass as to the interpretation of words "month & day" to be reckoned under Rule 96ZO(1) of Central Excise Rules, 1944.
2. We have heard both sides and find that under the scheme of compounded levy on Hot Stenter capacities, month is reckoned and understood as a calendar month for the purposes of levy and therefore no other interpretation of this word "month" could be given or understood as 30 days as has been pleaded. As regards the interpretation of the word "day" we find that this word is not defined in the rules and therefore will have to be understood as 24 hours or by any other understanding as established, and in this case we find that this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Singaravelar Mills Ltd. as in 2000 (39) RLT 474 has laid down as to how the word "day" has to be understood for the purposes of these rules. We find that this decision has been arrived at after looking into a Trade Notice issued by the concerned Collector. In the present case before us there is a Trade Notice issued by Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad-III which specifies in para 11 as follows:
The trade is informed that they should plan the time of closure during the normal office hours.
Therefore, the interpretation of the word "day" will have to be given the meaning as determined in this Bench decision mentioned supra and the Trade Notice No. 88/99 dated 6.12.1999 by Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad-III, the matters are therefore required to be remanded back to the lower authorities for de novo adjudication in view of our findings herein above.
3. The appeal & stay application are disposed of accordingly in the above terms by remand for de novo adjudication.
(Pronounced & Dictated in open court).