TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (5) TMI 428
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the applications are disposed off. 2. Since common questions of law and facts arise in all these appeals they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 3. These appeals arise from order dated 16-2-2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh whereby appeals filed by the respondents against the order of the adjudicating authority were allowed, holding that the respondents were eligible for the benefit of area based exemption Notification No. 56/2002-C.E., dated 14-11-2002 w.e.f. 26th August, 2006 as the production in their factory commenced from that date, subject to fulfilling the other requirements and eligibility criteria under the said notification. The adjudicating authority by order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....emption notification would not be admissible prior to that date and refund claim, therefore, would not be granted. Being aggrieved, the respondents preferred appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals). By the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) held that monthly returns filed by the respondents for the month of September, October and November, 2006 disclosed figures of production and clearances from the factory. The returns filed by the respondents apparently disclose the stamp of Range office, Kathua of having received the said returns in their office. The certificate issued by the industrial department disclose the provisional registration certificate revealing the date of commencement of production to be 26th August, 2008. Based on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... On the other hand, learned Advocate for the respondents drawing attention to the copies of the returns filed by the respondents for the month of September, October and November submitted that the returns clearly disclose the quantity of goods produced as well as the assessable value thereof which would clearly disclose that by no stretch of imagination the production in the months of September, October, and November was on trial basis. He further submitted that notification on the face of it nowhere require any certificate from the State Government or any of its department to decide the date of commencement of production. From the fact that the respondents filed monthly returns regarding the production from the factory which were no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the benefit under the notification should be counted from the date of publication of notification or from the date of commencement of the production, and nothing beyond that. 10. The question as to whether the manufacturer has commenced the production in the factory or not is essentially a matter of fact which is to be ascertained by taking into consideration the date of actual production in the factory. Undoubtedly, certificate issued by different competent authorities in this regard would carry evidentiary value. But in a case where the manufacturer who is statutorily required to disclose to the Excise Department the commencement of the manufacturing activity in such factory by filing proper declaration and such party in comp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and it is evident from para 8 of the said decision which read thus :- "We do not find any valid reason to go behind the correctness of the said certificate which records the fact that the appellant could not produce the cement and put it to commercial sale in absence of BIS Certificate. It also appears that only ad hoc permission was granted by the Ministry of Industries and Commerce under the communication dated 7-5-2002 for a period of 60 days w.e.f. 8-5-2002. Moreover, an approval from the Director of Industries and Commerce was received by the District Industries Centre only on 10-6-2002. It is thereafter that this certificate had been issued by the said authority showing that the appellant had started commercial production only fr....