Exemption eligibility and pre-deposit relief denied where records failed to prove use of indigenous raw materials.

Eligibility for exemption was not established because the applicant did not maintain lot registers or production records to show that goods cleared to the Domestic Tariff Area were made solely from indigenous raw materials, and departmental returns indicated use of imported yarn during the relevant period. On that basis, remand was refused as no useful purpose would be served on the factual issue. The claim for full waiver of pre-deposit was also declined because the conditions of Notification No. 23/2003-C.E. were not satisfied, including the requirement that the goods be produced wholly from raw materials produced or manufactured in India and the related Foreign Trade Policy conditions; Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. did not change the interim relief position. Interim protection was granted only on partial deposit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the matter called for remand on the plea that the goods cleared to the Domestic Tariff Area were manufactured from indigenous raw material, and whether full waiver of pre-deposit was warranted in view of the claimed entitlement to exemption under Notification No. 23/2003-C.E. read with Notification No. 30/2004-C.E.

Analysis: The applicant admitted that no lot register or production records were maintained to establish that the goods cleared to the Domestic Tariff Area were manufactured exclusively from indigenously procured material. The statutory returns produced by the Department indicated import and use of yarn during the relevant period, and therefore no useful purpose would be served by remand on that factual issue. On the exemption claim, the conditions attached to Notification No. 23/2003-C.E. were not satisfied, particularly the requirement that the goods be produced wholly from raw materials produced or manufactured in India and the other stipulated clearance conditions under the Foreign Trade Policy. The claimed applicability of Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. did not alter the conclusion for the purpose of interim relief. The financial hardship of the unit was noted, and the duty demand remained substantial even on the appellant's own alternative calculation.

Conclusion: The request for remand was rejected, and the applicant was directed to deposit Rs. 2 crores as a condition for stay of recovery of the balance duty, interest and penalties.

Final Conclusion: Interim relief was granted only in part, with limited protection against recovery upon partial deposit, while the substantive challenge was not found strong enough to justify complete waiver.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the appellant fails to maintain records necessary to prove eligibility for exemption and the departmental records indicate use of imported inputs, remand and complete waiver of pre-deposit may be refused, with interim relief confined to a partial deposit requirement.

---