Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Calcutta
M/S I.O.C. Ltd. vs Cce, Calcutta-Ii on 10 August, 2001
ORDER
Smt. Archana Wadhwa.
1. The prayer in the say petition is for dispensing with the condition of predeposit of duty amount of Rs.1,82,63,249/-(rupees one crore eighty two lakh sisty three thousand two hundred forty none) and equivalent amount of personal penalty imposed under the provision of section 11AC of Central Excise Act..
2. The said demand of duty has been confirmed by the Commissioner of Calcutta in respect of various intermediate petroleum products manufactured by the appellant in their refinery and used captively in the manufacture of furnace oil which was cleared free of duty duty under various exemption notifications. As such the adjudicating authority has observed that since the final product was cleared without payment of duty, duty is leviable on the product os manufactured by the appellant. Accordingly duty for the period March 1994 to September 1998 has been confirmed after issuing a show cause notice dt.1.4..99.
3. Shri R.Swaminathan, ld.consultant appearing for the appellant submits that they are not covered by notfn.no.67/95 inasmuch as it is rule 143A of Central Excise Rules which is applicable in respect of the good manufactured in their refinery and further used in the manufacturing processes. The Commissioner has observed that the special provision of rule 143a are intended for refinery and its object is to enable the refinery to utilise the intermediate products for further manufacturing process in the refinery itself. The said rule is only on enabling provision whereby the owner of the goods may undertake certain operations in the refinery and the same does not confer any exemption from duty on any excisable goods which may emerge as a result of permitted operations. As such we find that the issue is arguable from both the sides and no final view can be taken at this moment.
4. Similarly the appellants' contention about the demand being barred by limitation is also arguable inasmuch as the Commissioner has observed that no statutory requisite procedure for payment of duty on the said intermediate goods was undertaken by the appellant.
5. We also note that the appellants have not pleaded nay financial hardship. In these circumstances we direct the appellant to deposit an amount of Rs.25,00,000/-(rupees twenty five lakh) towards duty on or before 20.10.2001. Subject to deposit of the said amount of duty, the balence amount of duty and penalty shall stand waived and its recovery stayed during the pendency of the appeal. Matter to come up for ascertaining compliance on 25.10.2001. Subject to ascertaining compliance with the stay order the appeal itself would be taken up for final hearing on the said date.