Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether goods found in the factory, though not covered by the SSI exemption for one product, were liable to confiscation and consequential redemption fine and penalty when the unit otherwise operated under SSI exemption and entertained a bona fide belief that registration was not required.
Analysis: The goods were seized only on the premise that a particular item was outside Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. dated 01.03.2003. The rest of the manufactured goods were admittedly covered by the SSI exemption, and the unit's belief that the entire manufacturing activity was exempt was found to be bona fide. On those facts, the absence of registration did not indicate an attempt to clear goods clandestinely. At most, duty could be demanded on the non-exempt item and the goods directed to be cleared in accordance with law, but confiscation of stock lying in the factory was not justified.
Conclusion: The goods were not liable to confiscation under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, and the redemption fine and penalty could not be sustained. The decision was in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a unit is otherwise entitled to SSI exemption and non-registration is attributable to a bona fide belief that the entire unit is exempt, goods lying in the factory are not liable to confiscation merely because one product falls outside the exemption notification.