Sharp Tools Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore

Sharp Tools vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai Decided Feb 01, 2011

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/942616

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/942616
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Judge: The Honourable Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President &Amp; the Honourable Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member
Decided On: Feb 01, 2011
Case Number: Appeal Nos.E/763/04 & E/764/04 [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.91 & 92/2004-CE dt. 1
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sharp Tools

Advocate Shri M.Saravanan, Consultant. Shri T.H.Rao, SDR.

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore

Excerpt

per jyoti balasundaram in both these appeals, interest has been demanded from the assessees for the reason that they had not paid duty amount on fortnightly basis as per rule 173g (1) (a) of the erstwhile central excise rules, 1944 but instead paid on monthly basis and therefore there was a delay in payment. in appeal e/764/04 covering the period from jan-01 to aug-01 a penalty of rs.3000/- has been imposed. 2. we have heard both sides. as per rule 173g (1) (a), every manufacturer, other than a manufacturer who is availing exemption under a notification based on value of clearances in a financial year, is liable to pay duty in respect of clearances of excisable goods - (i) during the first fortnight of the month, by the 20th day of that month (ii) during the second fortnight of the month, by the 5th day of the succeeding month and (iii) during the second fortnight of march month, by the 31st day of march. the assessees being ssi unit, are availing exemption under a notification which is based upon the value of clearances in a financial year, therefore, assessees are not required to pay duty in respect of all clearance of goods on fortnightly basis. reliance placed by the revenue on circular no.547/43/2000-cx. dt. 11.9.2000 to the effect that if in any unit, which may also be owned by small scale manufacturer, only branded goods for others are manufactured on which normal rate of duty is payable, then benefit of rule 173gg / 173gg (1) cannot be claimed, is contrary to the provisions of relevant rules and, therefore, cannot be relied upon for the purpose of holding that assessees were required to pay duty on fortnightly basis. 3. in the light of the above, we set aside the interest demands and penalty and allow the appeals.

Full Judgment

Per Jyoti Balasundaram

In both these appeals, interest has been demanded from the assessees for the reason that they had not paid duty amount on fortnightly basis as per Rule 173G (1) (a) of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 but instead paid on monthly basis and therefore there was a delay in payment. In appeal E/764/04 covering the period from Jan-01 to Aug-01 a penalty of Rs.3000/- has been imposed.

2. We have heard both sides. As per Rule 173G (1) (a), every manufacturer, other than a manufacturer who is availing exemption under a notification based on value of clearances in a financial year, is liable to pay duty in respect of clearances of excisable goods - (i) during the first fortnight of the month, by the 20th day of that month (ii) during the second fortnight of the month, by the 5th day of the succeeding month and (iii) during the second fortnight of March month, by the 31st day of March. The assessees being SSI unit, are availing exemption under a notification which is based upon the value of clearances in a financial year, therefore, assessees are not required to pay duty in respect of all clearance of goods on fortnightly basis. Reliance placed by the Revenue on Circular No.547/43/2000-CX. dt. 11.9.2000 to the effect that if in any unit, which may also be owned by small scale manufacturer, only branded goods for others are manufactured on which normal rate of duty is payable, then benefit of Rule 173GG / 173GG (1) cannot be claimed, is contrary to the provisions of relevant Rules and, therefore, cannot be relied upon for the purpose of holding that assessees were required to pay duty on fortnightly basis.

3. In the light of the above, we set aside the interest demands and penalty and allow the appeals.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chen... Same Parties Sharp Tools vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore Same Subject Excise Same Judge The Honourable Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President &Amp; t...