TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Manufacturer's exports included in exemption criteria calculation under Central Excise Notification. Tribunal decision analyzed.</h1> The Tribunal ruled in favor of the department, holding that all excisable goods cleared by the manufacturer, including exports, should be included in ... Value of clearances Issues:Interpretation of Central Excise Notification No. 176/77 regarding exemption criteria based on the value of clearances for excisable goods, including exports.Analysis:1. The case involved an appeal regarding the exemption from Central Excise duty claimed by the respondents under Notification No. 176/77-C.E. based on the value of clearances of goods under Central Excise Tariff Item 68 and the value of their Plant & Machinery. The Assistant Collector denied the exemption as the total value of all excisable goods cleared by the respondents exceeded Rs. 30 lakhs. However, the Collector (Appeals) Bombay ruled in favor of the respondents, considering the value of goods exported and the specific provision in the notification related to clearances for home consumption.2. The Tribunal analyzed the main provision and the proviso of the notification separately. The main provision exempted goods under Tariff Item 68 cleared for home consumption if the capital investment in plant and machinery was not more than Rs. 10 lakhs. The proviso stated that the exemption would not apply if the total value of all excisable goods cleared in the preceding year exceeded Rs. 30 lakhs. The Tribunal disagreed with the interpretation that the proviso excluded exported goods from the calculation, emphasizing that the proviso did not specify such an exclusion.3. Member (T) P.C. Jain disagreed with the majority opinion, focusing on the interpretation of the word 'cleared' in the proviso. He argued that the proviso should be read in conjunction with the main provision, limiting the scope of the exemption to goods cleared for home consumption. Citing principles of statutory interpretation, Jain highlighted that the subject-matter of the exemption was goods cleared for home consumption under Tariff Item 68, and the proviso should be interpreted accordingly.4. Jain further contended that restricting the interpretation to include exports in the calculation of clearances exceeding Rs. 30 lakhs would contradict the objective of export promotion. He pointed out that goods for export were already exempted from duty under other rules, and including them in the total value for exemption purposes would unfairly burden exporters. Consequently, Jain dismissed the appeal filed by the Collector, advocating for a more restrictive interpretation of the exemption criteria.5. The majority decision upheld the appeals of the department, setting aside the order of the Collector (Appeals) and ruling in favor of including all excisable goods cleared by the manufacturer in the calculation of the exemption criteria. Member (T) P.C. Jain's dissenting opinion was overruled, and the Tribunal concluded that the exemption under Notification No. 176/77 should not exclude the value of exported goods when determining the total value of clearances for exemption eligibility.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
