2000 (4) TMI 331

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sequence to the benefit of Notification 175/86 from the date of their application made to the Directorate of Cottage Small Scale Industries or the same would be applicable from the date when the actual registration certificate was granted to the appellants. Apart from this, the demand has also been assailed on the point of limitation. 2. Arguing on the appeal, Shri K.K. Banerjee, ld. advocate submits that the appellants started their production with effect from 16-7-1987 and applied to the Directorate of Cottage and Small Scale Industries on 19-9-1987. After applying, they started to avail the benefit of small-scale exemption notification 175/86 dated 1-3-1986 and informed the Department accordingly. In this connection, he draws our....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Directorate. Accordingly, he submits that this point raised by the Revenue is not valid point. As regards the applicability of the small-scale certificate with effect from the date of application, he submits that the issue is no more res integra and has been decided by the Majority decision in the case of Melvin Powell Vanaspati & Engineering Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Cal. I [2000 (125) E.L.T. 974 (Tribunal) = 1999 (32) RLT 801 (CEGAT)] and followed by the Tribunal in a number of cases. The reference in this regard has been made by Shri Banerjee to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Borg Instrumentations Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi [2000 (115) E.L.T. 693 (Tri.) = 2000 (36) RLT 631 (CEGAT)].....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l-scale certificate on 18-1-1992, do not have any legal validity. As such, he submits that the question of small-scale certificate effective from the date of application does not arise at all. Accordingly, he submits that the ratio of the Tribunal's decision in the case of Melvin Powell (supra) should not be followed inasmuch as the facts of the instant case are different. As regards the limitation, he submits that the Commissioner has dealt with the point of invokation of longer period in detail in the impugned order. Though he has admitted the appellants' letter written in 1987 to the Department informing their intention of availing of small-scale exemption notification benefit, he submits that the said letter cannot come to the rescue of....