Sri Kanakadhara Textiles (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore - Court Judgment |
| Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai |
| Oct-13-2009 |
| Appeal No.E/1040 of 2003 |
| THE HONOURABLE MS. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, VICE PRESIDENT & THE HONOURABLE DR. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER |
| Sri Kanakadhara Textiles (P) Ltd. |
| Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore |
| Shri S.Kandaswamy, Consultant. Shri T.H.Rao, SDR |
per jyoti balasundaram the issue for determination in the present appeal namely as to whether few clearances of goods at the beginning of financial year on payment of normal duty is to be construed as de facto opting out of exemption under ssi notification stands settled in favour of the assessees by the decisions of the larger bench in the case of commissioner vs marutham textiles (p) ltd. [2003 (153) elt 219] and ankit packaging ltd. vs cce hyderabad [2004 (165) elt 228]. the tribunal has held that when there was no specific exercise of opting out of ssi benefit notification, few clearances on payment of duty at the beginning of the financial year could not be construed as de facto opting out of the exemption which was required to be in specific terms in view of proviso to notification no.1/93-ce dt. 28.2.1993. 2. following the ratio of the above decisions, we set aside the impugned order denying the benefit of ssi notification, and allow the appeal.
Per Jyoti Balasundaram
The issue for determination in the present appeal namely as to whether few clearances of goods at the beginning of financial year on payment of normal duty is to be construed as de facto opting out of exemption under SSI notification stands settled in favour of the assessees by the decisions of the Larger Bench in the case of Commissioner Vs Marutham Textiles (P) Ltd. [2003 (153) ELT 219] and Ankit Packaging Ltd. Vs CCE Hyderabad [2004 (165) ELT 228]. The Tribunal has held that when there was no specific exercise of opting out of SSI benefit notification, few clearances on payment of duty at the beginning of the financial year could not be construed as de facto opting out of the exemption which was required to be in specific terms in view of proviso to Notification No.1/93-CE dt. 28.2.1993.
2. Following the ratio of the above decisions, we set aside the impugned order denying the benefit of SSI notification, and allow the appeal.