TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal grants Small Scale Exemption benefit based on registration compliance and continuity</h1> <h3>CREATIVE REMEDIES (AHD.) PVT. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD</h3> CREATIVE REMEDIES (AHD.) PVT. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD - 2009 (233) E.L.T. 88 (Tri. - Ahmd.) Issues:1. Denial of Small Scale Exemption benefit due to lack of registration with competent authority.2. Interpretation of Para 4 of Notification No. 175/86 regarding small scale industry registration requirements.3. Application of small scale exemption benefit for subsequent financial years.Analysis:The appellant filed appeals against the denial of Small Scale Exemption benefit under Notification No. 175/86 due to not being registered as a Small Scale unit with the competent authority during a specific period. The appellant contended that they applied for registration as a Small Scale unit on 17-5-1998 and received provisional registration, subsequently obtaining permanent registration on 1-8-1992. They argued that once they availed the benefit under a valid certificate, it cannot be denied in subsequent financial years. The appellant cited relevant tribunal decisions to support their claim.The Revenue's contention was that since the appellants were not registered as a small scale unit during the relevant period, they were not entitled to the benefit. However, the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument, stating that as per Para 4 of the Notification, the appellants were indeed entitled to the benefit. The Tribunal referred to the specific provisions of Para 4, which outlined the registration requirements for small scale industries under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. The Tribunal noted that the appellants had availed the benefit for the financial year 1989-90, thereby establishing their eligibility for subsequent financial years as well.Based on the interpretation of Para 4 and the precedent set by previous tribunal decisions, the Tribunal concluded that the denial of the benefit to the appellants was not justified. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellant. The judgment highlighted the importance of compliance with registration requirements and the continuity of benefit eligibility under the relevant notification.
TaxTMI 