Compounded levy interpretation: "month" means a calendar month and "day" is read with prior Tribunal practice and trade notice guidance.

Under the compounded levy scheme for hot stenter capacities, the term "month" is construed as a calendar month and not as a 30-day period. The term "day" is not defined in the Rules and was understood consistently with the Tribunal's earlier approach, read alongside the relevant Trade Notice requiring closure to be planned during normal office hours. On that interpretation, the appellant's contention was rejected and the matter was remanded for de novo adjudication.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for the purpose of Rule 96ZO(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the words "month" and "day" were to be construed as a calendar month and as 24 hours or otherwise for levy under the compounded levy scheme.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that under the compounded levy scheme for hot stenter capacities, "month" is to be understood as a calendar month and not as a period of 30 days. On the meaning of "day", it noted that the term is not defined in the Rules and had to be understood in the manner already adopted by the Tribunal in an earlier decision, also taking into account the relevant Trade Notice issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad-III, which required closure to be planned during normal office hours.

Conclusion: The words "month" and "day" were construed against the appellant's contention, and the matter was remanded to the lower authority for de novo adjudication.

---