Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Palani Andavar Cotton vs Cce, Trichy on 14 September, 2009
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI
E/AG/225/2009 & E/524/2002
(Arising out of Order in Appeal No. 124/2002 dated 28.06.2002, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, (Appeals), Trichy).
For approval and signature
Honble Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice President
Honble Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, Technical Member
_____________________________________________________________
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the :
order for Publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication
in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether the Honble Member wishes to see the fair :
copy of the Order.
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the :
Departmental Authorities? _____________________________________________________________
M/s. Palani Andavar Cotton : Appellant
and Synthetic Spinners Ltd.,
Vs.
CCE, Trichy : Respondent
Appearance Shri N. Inbarajan, Adv., for the appellant Ms Indira Sisupal, JDR, for the respondent CORAM Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice President Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, Technical Member Date of hearing : 14.09.2009 Date of decision : 14.09.2009 Final ORDER No._____________ Per: Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Heard both sides. The appellants unit (M/s. Vidyasagar Textiles) has availed small scale exemption upto 23.09.2000. The department has disallowed the exemption on the ground that the unit is amalgamated with M/s. Palani Andavar Cotton & Synthetic Spinners Ltd. w.e.f. 1.4.2000. Shri N. Inbarajan, Ld. Advocate., for the appellant states that though the scheme of amalgamation specified the date of amalgamation as 1.4.2000, the scheme of amalgamation was subject to approval by the Honble High Court and other statutory authorities. The date of approval by the Honble High Court is 28.07.2000 and subsequently, the application before the Registrar of Companies was made on 28.09.2000. As such, he prays that the small scale exemption should be allowed till the effective date of amalgamation and it should be taken as the date of application to the Registrar of Companies. He also states that in a similar case, the Tribunal had held the effective date to be 08.03.94 though the transfer date was 01.04.93 vide Technocraft Industries (I) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mumbai-III 2000 (120) ELT 106 (Tri.). He prays that this decision may be followed in the present case and the exemption should be allowed.
2. Heard the Ld. JDR, Ms. Indira Sisupal, who argues that the appellant company is seen to have consolidated clearances with effect from 01.04.2000 and hence they should not be allowed exemption with effect from 01.04.2000.
3. After hearing both sides, we find that though the scheme of amalgamation envisaged 01.04.2000 as the effective date, the scheme itself stated that such amalgamation was subject to approval by the Honble High Court and as well as approval by the concerned authorities. In the present case, the scheme of amalgamation was sanctioned by the High Court only on 28.07.2000, and the Registrar of Companies has allowed the amalgamation with effect from 16.05.2001. We also find that the appellants have availed the small scale exemption only upto 23.09.2000 and thereafter, they have paid the normal duty. In view of the conditions contained in the scheme of amalgamation and the fact that approvals of the Honble High Court and the Registrar of Companies have been obtained later on, following the ratio of the earlier Tribunals decision in the case of Technocraft Industries (supra), we hold that the appellants cannot be denied SSI exemption for the limited period they have actually availed the same till 23.09.2000. As such, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
4. In view of the appeal being disposed of as indicated above, the application for submission of additional grounds is not required to be gone into and the same is dismissed.
(Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
(Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY) (JYOTI BALASUNDARAM)
TECHNICAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
BB
4