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 the assessee complied with the requirement of giving at least three working days' prior intimation under Rule 10 of the Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity determination and collection of duty) Rules, 2008 for abatement of duty on account of non-production, and was therefore entitled to refund/abatement.
Analysis: Rule 10 permits abatement where a PMPM machine remains non-operative for the prescribed period, subject to prior intimation of at least three working days and sealing/uninstalling by the department. The central dispute was whether 'three working days' must mean the Central Excise office's working days or the factory's working days. The reasoning accepted that 'working days' cannot be confined to the Central Government office schedule and must be understood in the context of the assessee's manufacturing establishment. The factory ran six days a week, Saturday was a working day for it, and the intimation given on Friday, followed by Saturday and Monday, satisfied the requirement. Since sealing and uninstalling of the machine were not in dispute, the procedural condition of Rule 10 stood complied with.
Conclusion: The assessee had complied with Rule 10 and was entitled to abatement/refund; the Revenue's appeal failed.
Ratio Decidendi: For purposes of Rule 10, 'three working days' prior intimation is to be understood with reference to the assessee's operational working days, not merely the working days of the Central Excise office.