TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (9) TMI 702
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... exemption under Notification No. 32/99-C.E. was available and in terms of the conditions of that Notification he sanctioned a refund of Rs. 72,60,000/- under Order-in-Original dated 17-1-2000 and a refund of Rs. 1,95,36,000/- under Order-in-Original dated 11-2-2000. The Department filed Review Appeals against both these Orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise before the Commissioner (Appeals), C. Excise, Guwahati who under her Order-in-Appeal dated 18-5-2001 confirmed the view taken by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, the Adjudicating Authority and dismissed the Review Appeals of the Department. In the present appeal the Revenue had pleaded that the impugned Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) be set aside and the Orders-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise be restored. The prayer for restoring the Orders-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner is obviously a mistake as both the Orders-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise were in favour of M/s. NETCO and the Department had filed Review Appeals against those Orders-in-Original before the Comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en initiated by the Ministry of Industries and the necessary endorsement with regard to the new location had been given on the existing licence by the Industries Department. The learned Advocate also submitted that the Notification has to be interpreted on the basis of its plain language. In support of his various contentions the learned Advocate relied upon the various decisions of the Tribunal, High Courts and the Supreme Court. 3. We have carefully considered the matter. M/s. NETCO were engaged in the manufacture of cigarettes. For their factory at Amingaon in Assam they obtained Central Excise registration under Rule, 174 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), from the jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities on 25-11-99. Their Central Excise registration certificate was bearing No. 5/060308/Chapter 24/AMG/99 and was dated 25-11-99. This was issued in pursuance of their application in Form R-1 filed on 1-11-99. Earlier M/s. NETCO had obtained provisional registration certificate on 29-10-99 from Directorate of Industries, Government of Assam. Their provisional registration certificate was bearing No. 020518582 and was dated 29-10-99. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n to the manufacturer by the 15th of the next month. (c) If there is likely to be any delay in the verification the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise as the case may be, shall refund the amount on provisional basis by the 15th of the next month to the month under consideration, and thereafter may adjust the amount of refund by such amount as may be necessary in the subsequent refunds admissible to the manufacture. 3. The exemption contained in this Notification shall apply only to the following kind of units namely :- (a) New industrial units which have commenced their commercial production on or after the 24th day of December, 1997. (b) Industrial units existing before the 24th day of December 1997 but which have undertaken substantial expansion by way of increase in installed capacity by not less then twenty five per cent on or after the 24th day of December, 1997. 4. The exemption contained in this Notification shall apply to any of the said units for a period not exceeding ten years from the date of publication of this Notification in the Official Gazette or f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal has been preferred by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Tribunal, the same was registered as Appeal No. ER-19-20/2001 and lying pending before CEGAT, ERB, Kolkata. 2. A prima facie case of irregular availment of the benefits of exemption under Notification No. 32/99-C.E., dated 8-7-99 has been booked by the officers of DGCEL, East Zonal Unit, Kolkata against M/s. NETCO, Amingaon, Guwahati. 3. That the submissions made herein above fully justifies admittance of the appeal by the Tribunal for setting aside the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Guwahati and restoring the Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Jorhat and for passing such an order as may deem fit. As regards the first ground of appeal filed by the Revenue against the earlier Order-in-Appeal dated 19-12-2000 of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), the matter related to the entitlement of M/s. NETCO to the benefit of Notification No. 32/99-C.E.. The Commissioner (Appeals) had held that M/s. NETCO were eligible for the benefit of the aforesaid Notification. In the mean while ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had been observed that the scope of these two Notification Nos. 32/99-C.E. and 33/99-C.E. was required to be understood, in the context of the various incentive schemes announced by the Government of India and formulated by the Ministry of Industry. On the basis of investigations by the officers of the Directorate General, Anti-Evasion which were summerised in para 9 of that Show-cause Notice and it had alleged that M/s. NETCO unit at EPIP, Amingaon may not be treated as a new Industrial unit. Their production activities were not backed by any valid Industrial licence. Their old activity was unauthorisedly shifted to Amingaon with a view to avail of the benefit of exemption without being eligible for the same. It was also alleged that the licence/registration/approval etc. were obtained by misrepresenting the facts. The bona fide of M/s. NETCO as independent unit had been questioned on various grounds. The Central Excise duty in the Show-cause Notice had been demanded for the period from 15-12-99 to 14-9-2000. The period involved in the present proceedings is from 22-12-99 to 31-12-99 and 17-1-99 to 31-1-2000. Thus the period is overlaping. This show cause notice is not before ....