Appeal granted for SSI exemption on granite slabs under Notification No. 26/2002. Decision provided on 03/10/2016.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting SSI exemption benefit for polished granite slabs for 26 days in 2002. Relying on Notification No.26/2002, the Tribunal found that no central excise duty liability existed for the mentioned period, in line with the legislative intent and specific provisions of the notification. The decision, delivered on 03/10/2016, favored the appellant, providing consequential relief based on the analysis of relevant notifications and case law.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against Order-in-Appeal denying SSI Notification benefit for 26 days in 2002.

Analysis:
1. The appellant contested the denial of SSI exemption for polished granite slabs under Chapter 6807 for 26 days in 2002. They argued that Notification No.26/2002 allowed the SSI exemption benefit for the subject item during the relevant period. The appellant relied on the Notification's specific provisions to support their claim of no central excise duty liability for the mentioned period.

2. The appellant emphasized that the legislative intent, as per Notification No.26/2002, was not to charge duty on polished granite slabs during the disputed period. They referred to the clear wording of the notification, which included the subject item under the benefit of Notification No.8/2002. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument, highlighting the specific mention of goods falling under Chapter Heading 6807 in the notification.

3. The Tribunal analyzed the wording of Notification No.26/2002 in detail, noting that clearances made at nil rate of duty during the relevant period would not be charged duty. They referenced a Supreme Court decision supporting the interpretation that no duty demand could be made for the subject item during the 26-day period in question. The Tribunal concluded that the consistent policy of exempting the subject item from duty, as clarified by the notification, justified allowing the appeal.

4. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, providing consequential relief to the appellant based on the detailed analysis of the notifications, legislative intent, and relevant case law. The judgment was delivered on 03/10/2016, in favor of the appellant.

---