Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M/S Sreevaree Textile Machinery P. Ltd. on 3 August, 2001
ORDER
S.L. Peeran, Member (Judicial)
1. In both these appeals, filed by the Revenue, the issue involved being common, hence both the appeals are taken up together for disposal as per law.
2. The same Commissioner has passed two independent orders.
3. The issue involved in these appeals is as to whether the value of single machinery can be split up for the purpose of availing exemption under Notification No.1/93 dt.28.2.93, on payment of appropriate duty on the value in excess of the exemption limit.
4. The Commissioner (Appeals) has held in in the case of Shri Venkateswara Industries is as follows.
"5. I find force in the submissions made by the appellant. A plain reading of the Notification No.1/93 makes it clear that the Notification extends exemption to the specified goods as per the annexure to the Notification in different slabs and the words used are....." in the case of first clearance of the specified goods upto an aggregate value not exceeding rupees thirty lakhs" vide para 1(a) of Notification; similarly the second proviso clause says that the aggregate value of specified goods in terms of sub clause (a) (b) and C taken together shall not exceed rs.75 lakhs vide para 1 (b) of the Notification. Thus the emphasis here is to the aggregate value of clearances and there is no stipulation as regards the value of single; unit or group of units etc. It is settled position of law that there is no room for intendment in the matter of interpretation of exemption notifications vide ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Hemraj Gordhandas reported in 1978 (2) ELT J 350 (SC) and so we have to go by the plain words used in the notification. I, therefore see no warrant for the view taken by the AC here for denying the slab rate of duty on the split up value of the single unit covered by the relevant gaterpasses as above. The AC's order is therefore not maintainable in law."
5. The Ld. DR submits that the Revenue is aggrieved with both the orders and seeks for setting aside the same in terms of the grounds made out in the appeal memorandum. It is stated that both the Tribunal's order relied upon by the Commissioner have not been accepted by the Revenue and they have filed the application for rectification of mistake and recall of the order and therefore, he seeks for allowing the appeal. Both representatives for the respondents submit that the issue is no longer re integra and the matter has been decided in terms of the Tribunal decision quoted by the Commissioner and also decided in the case of CCE Vs. Helios Antennas & Electronics reported in 1998 (102) ELT 37 (T). It is brought to our notice that the Tribunal has dismissed similar appeals filed by the Revenue and one such case came up yesterday and the Tribunal following the ratio of the cited judgment dismissed the Revenue appeal.
6. On a careful consideration of the submissions made by both the sides, we do not find any force in the submissions of the LD.DR and the matter is fully covered by the judgments cited by the Commissioner in his order. The findings recorded by the Tribunal in the case of CCE Vs. Helios Antennas & Electronics (supra) para 4 to 6 are reproduced below.
4. In this case, the respondent was availing exemption under Notification No.175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986. Before 10-6-1988, the respondent cleared the goods to the value of Rs. 14,82,575/-. On 10-6-1988, they had still Rs. 17,425/- to cross the exemption limit of Rs. 15 lac as provided under Notification-No.175/86-C.E. On 10-6-1988, the respondents cleared two antennae of total value of Rs.54,500/- under G.P.I. They had paid duty after deducting the amount of Rs. 17,425/- from the total value of the clearance. A show cause notice was issued to the respondents on the ground that the duty is to be paid on the full value of the goods cleared by the respondents through G.P.I. dated 10-6-1988. The adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings. The Revenue filed an appeal before the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals) and the Collector (Appeals) also rejected the appeal.
5. Notification No.175/86-C.E. dated 1-3-1986 provides exemption on the value of the goods cleared. The notification also provides exemption upto the value of Rs.15 lac from the whole of the duty of excise leviable. The respondents as on 10-6-1988 still had Rs.17,425/- to cross the exemption limit of Rs. 15 lac. As notification provides exemption on the value of the goods and not the quantum of the goods hence the respondents are entitled for deduction of Rs. 17,425/- from the total value of clearance of GPI dated 10-6-1988.
6. In view of the above discussions, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.
7. On a careful consideration we notice that the issue is already covered by the above judgment and as such there being no merit, both the appeals. filed by the Revenue are rejected.
(order dictated and pronounced in the open court)