M/S. Indo Tex Prints (Overseas) Vs. Cce, New Delhi and Cce, Jaipur - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....(acp).2. the appellants are independents textile processors working under the compounded levy scheme under section 3a of the central excise act and the rules framed thereunder. when the jurisdictional commissioners determined their acp, they included the lengths of galleries (attached to hot air stenters) also for determination of annual capacity of production under the provisions of the hot air stenter independent textile processors annual capacity determination rules, 1998. the grievance of the appellants in these appeals is against such inclusion of gallery length in the parameters of hot air stenter for the purpose of determination of acp.4. ld. advocate shri y.k.kumar representing the appellant in appeal no.e/1351/2000-nb(sm) and ld. chartered accountant shri pradeep jain, representing the appellants in the remaining appeals submit that the question whether the gallery length is includible in the parameters of hot air stenter for the purpose of determination of acp has already been settled in favour of the independent textile processors by a larger bench of this tribunal in the case of sangam processors bhilwara ltd. vs cce, jaipur [2001 (42) rlt 429 (cegat-lb)]......

Judgment:

1. In all these appeals, the appellants are aggrieved by orders of the jurisdictional Commissioners of Central Excise determining annual capacity of production (ACP).

2. The appellants are independents textile processors working under the compounded Levy Scheme under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act and the Rules framed thereunder. When the jurisdictional Commissioners determined their ACP, they included the lengths of galleries (attached to Hot Air Stenters) also for determination of Annual Capacity of Production under the provisions of the Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998. The grievance of the appellants in these appeals is against such inclusion of gallery length in the parameters of Hot Air Stenter for the purpose of determination of ACP.4. Ld. Advocate Shri Y.K.Kumar representing the appellant in appeal No.E/1351/2000-NB(SM) and ld. Chartered Accountant Shri Pradeep Jain, representing the appellants in the remaining appeals submit that the question whether the gallery length is includible in the parameters of Hot Air Stenter for the purpose of determination of ACP has already been settled in favour of the Independent Textile Processors by a Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Sangam Processors Bhilwara Ltd. Vs CCE, Jaipur [2001 (42) RLT 429 (CEGAT-LB)]. This submission is not contested.

5. On a perusal of the order of the Larger Bench, I find that gallery lengths have been held to be not includible in the parameters of Hot Air Stenter for the purpose of determination of ACP of Independent Textile Processors, by the Larger Bench in Sangam Processors (supra).

Therefore, following the Larger Bench decision, the impugned orders should be set aside. The jurisdictional Commissioners will have to re-determine the ACP of the respective textile processors by excluding the galleries from the parameters of the Hot Air Stenters.

6. In view of the above, I set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals by way of remand, directing the respective Commissioners of Central Excise to re-determine the ACP in the above terms.