Tribunal grants abatement claim for December 2014 under Chewing Tobacco Rules

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant was entitled to the abatement claim for December 2014 under the Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines Rules, 2010. The Tribunal found that the appellant had paid the duty for December 2014 and met the requirements for the abatement claim, despite the initial rejection based on the previous month's claim status. The impugned order was set aside, and the adjudicating order sanctioning the abatement claim was upheld, granting the appellant consequential relief as necessary.

---

---

Issues: Abatement claim denial for duty paid under Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines Rules, 2010.

The appellant appealed against the denial of the abatement claim for duty paid under the Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines Rules, 2010 by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant had paid duty in advance for November 2014 but filed an abatement claim as the factory was closed for more than 15 days. The claim was initially sanctioned but was later rejected for December 2014 by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on the reasoning that the abatement claim for November 2014 had been set aside. The appellant argued that they were entitled to the abatement claim for December 2014 as well, given the circumstances of their claim and payment history. The Revenue supported the findings of the impugned order. The Tribunal noted that the factory was closed for 15 days in December 2014, making the appellant eligible for the abatement claim as per Rule 10 of the relevant regulations. The Tribunal found that the appellant had paid the duty for December 2014, even though the abatement claim for November 2014 had not been fully adjusted until a later date due to departmental insistence. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to the abatement claim for December 2014 and set aside the impugned order, upholding the adjudicating order for sanctioning the abatement claim. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any.

---