2011 (3) TMI 599 - AT - Central Excise

Appellate Tribunal Grants Stay on Pre-deposit Conditions in Duty & Penalty Dispute

ACCURATE TRANS HEAT PVT. LIMITED Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., SURAT

The appellate tribunal granted unconditional stay to the appellants in a case concerning the waiver of pre-deposit conditions of duty and penalties. The ... Waiver of pre-deposit - Appeal relates to availability of exemption of Notification No. 6/02-C.E., dated 1-3-2002 and 6/06-C.E., dated 1-3-2006 to the “Drum Washer Machine” and “Relax Drum Washer Machine” manufactured by the appellants - Held that:- the Commissioner (Appeals) has interpreted the said entry of the notification in favour of the other assessees similarly situate - Prima facie stage, appellants are entitled to unconditional stay. Issues:1. Dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty and penalty.2. Interpretation of exemption notification for 'Drum Washer Machine' and 'Relax Drum Washer Machine.'Analysis:1. The primary issue in this case was the application to waive the pre-deposit condition of duty and penalty amounts imposed on the manufacturing unit and the director. The appellant sought relief from the duty amount of Rs. 83,89,735 and an identical penalty, along with a separate penalty of Rs. One lakh on the director of the company.2. The dispute revolved around the interpretation of the exemption notification (No. 6/02-C.E., dated 1-3-2002 and 6/06-C.E., dated 1-3-2006) concerning the eligibility of the 'Drum Washer Machine' and 'Relax Drum Washer Machine' manufactured by the appellants. The appellate authority did not agree with the appellant's argument that the exemption covered both categories of machines. The Commissioner held that only six types of dryers specified in the notification were eligible for exemption.3. During the adjudication process, the appellants presented opinions from MANTRA and their Chartered Engineer supporting their claim. However, the Commissioner rejected these opinions and maintained that only the dryers explicitly mentioned in the notification were eligible for exemption.4. A significant development in the case was the subsequent order by the Commissioner (Appeals) in a related matter involving a different company. The Commissioner (Appeals) ruled in favor of the other assessee, Bhagyarekha Engineering Pvt. Limited, after considering expert opinions from MANTRA. The Commissioner emphasized that the 'Relax Drum Machine' was not merely a washing machine but a specialized processing machinery for fabric treatment, thereby justifying its eligibility for exemption.5. Considering the favorable interpretation by the Commissioner (Appeals) in a similar case, the appellate tribunal granted unconditional stay to the appellants in this case. The tribunal acknowledged the technical nuances involved in interpreting the exemption notification and allowed the stay petitions based on the favorable precedent set by the Commissioner (Appeals).This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented, expert opinions considered, and the final decision granting relief to the appellants based on the favorable interpretation of the exemption notification.