Rule 29 compliance for cured tobacco is satisfied by reporting transfer to the curer's jurisdictional excise officer.

Under Rule 29 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, a curer's liability for excise duty continues only until transfer of ownership of cured tobacco is reported to, and acknowledged by, the proper officer having jurisdiction over the curer's operations. The scheme of Rules 2(xi), 19, 24, 26 and 31 links compliance to the excise officer where the curing activity is carried out, and does not require reporting to the officer of the transferee's warehouse merely because the goods move under a transport certificate. The note states that the transferee's officer may proceed against the transferee for its own stock, but the curer is not required to satisfy that officer.

---

---

Issues: Whether, under Rule 29 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the curer's liability to pay excise duty continued until the transfer of ownership of the cured tobacco was reported to and acknowledged by the excise officer at the transferee's place, or whether reporting to and acknowledgment by the excise officer within whose jurisdiction the curing operations were carried out was sufficient.

Analysis: Rule 29 postpones absolution of the curer's liability until transfer of ownership is reported to, and acknowledged by, the proper officer. The definition of "proper officer" in Rule 2(xi) ties jurisdiction to the officer where the producer or curer carries on the relevant operations. Read with Rules 19, 24, 26 and 31, the scheme requires the curer to account to the officer within whose jurisdiction the curing activity was done, while the transferee's officer may proceed against the transferee for his own stocks. The curer is not required to satisfy the officer having jurisdiction over the purchaser's warehouse merely because the goods were transferred under a transport certificate.

Conclusion: The petitioner's compliance with reporting and acknowledgment by the excise officer at the place of curing was sufficient, and the duty demand could not be sustained.

Final Conclusion: The duty demand was quashed and the writ petition succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Under Rule 29 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the curer's liability ceases upon reporting and acknowledgment of transfer by the proper officer having jurisdiction over the curer's operations, not by the officer having jurisdiction over the transferee's warehouse.

---